Re: [pkg-wpa-devel] Bug#644823: uninstallable on kfreebsd-* (depends on uninstallable libpcap0.8 from non-udeb land)
Hi
On Friday 14 October 2011, Robert Millan wrote:
Hi Stefan,
2011/10/13 Stefan Lippers-Hollmann s@gmx.de:
Does this affect daily d-i builds or is it 'just' wpasupplicant-udeb
(new package) being unusable without affecting the kfreebsd ports yet?
It breaks daily builds.
So as far as I understand it, we have two options:
- asking libpcap maintainers to add an udeb for wpasupplicant-udeb to
use
or
- disabling to build wpasupplicant-udeb on kfreebsd-any (making it
linux-any) and to remove the 0.7.3-4 binaries from the archive, as
long as there is not libpcap udeb.
Which of these options would you, as the kfreebsd porters, prefer to
pursue for now?
We need to restore D-I buildability ASAP IMHO, so please go with the
second one untill we have libpcap-udeb.
I've prepared an according upload at:
dgethttp://aptosid.com/slh/wpasupplicant/wpasupplicant_0.7.3-5.dsc
http://aptosid.com/slh/wpasupplicant/wpasupplicant_0.7.3-5.debian.tar.gz
http://aptosid.com/slh/wpasupplicant/wpasupplicant_0.7.3.orig.tar.gz
build tested on amd64, i386 and kfreebsd-amd64, the kfreebsd-any udeb
doesn't get created anymore, debdiff between 0.7.3-4 and 0.7.3-5 below.
It would be great if you could sponsor that upload, as I can only try
to contact our regular sponsor this evening.
In the meantime we could file a wishlist request to libpcap
maintainer? I don't have time to prepare a patch but maybe he's
willing to help.
I will file a wishlist bug against libpcap, hopefully with a build-
tested patch, over the weekend.
Regards
Stefan Lippers-Hollmann
--
diff -Nru wpasupplicant-0.7.3/debian/changelog
wpasupplicant-0.7.3/debian/changelog
--- wpasupplicant-0.7.3/debian/changelog2011-09-26 23:37:59.0
+0200
+++ wpasupplicant-0.7.3/debian/changelog2011-10-14 10:38:44.0
+0200
@@ -1,3 +1,12 @@
+wpasupplicant (0.7.3-5) unstable; urgency=low
+
+ * restrict wpasupplicant-udeb to linux-any, until a udeb for libpcap0.8 gets
+available for kfreebsd-any (Closes: #644823).
+ * build-depend on libncurses5-dev explicitly, as it is no longer pulled in
+indirectly.
+
+ -- Stefan Lippers-Hollmann s@gmx.de Fri, 14 Oct 2011 10:35:42 +0200
+
wpasupplicant (0.7.3-4) unstable; urgency=low
[ Kel Modderman ]
diff -Nru wpasupplicant-0.7.3/debian/control wpasupplicant-0.7.3/debian/control
--- wpasupplicant-0.7.3/debian/control 2011-09-16 02:39:52.0 +0200
+++ wpasupplicant-0.7.3/debian/control 2011-10-14 10:21:04.0 +0200
@@ -10,6 +10,7 @@
libreadline-dev,
libqt4-dev,
libdbus-1-dev,
+ libncurses5-dev,
libpcsclite-dev,
libnl3-dev (= 3.0-1.1) [linux-any],
libpcap-dev [kfreebsd-any],
@@ -45,7 +46,7 @@
Package: wpasupplicant-udeb
Section: debian-installer
Priority: standard
-Architecture: any
+Architecture: linux-any
Package-Type: udeb
Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}, ${misc:Depends}, busybox-udeb
Description: Client support for WPA and WPA2 (IEEE 802.11i)
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Bug#645305: zfsutils dependencies break ABI and aren't properly versioned
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Package: src:zfsutils Version: 8.1-4+squeeze1 Severity: serious Justification: breaks upgrades, does not declare dependencies properly Out of the zfsutils package are being built several shared libraries. These do not bump any SONAME version or provide a symbols file. Hence, shlibs generates zfsutils dependencies unversioned: Depends: libbsd0 (= 0.0), libc0.1 (= 2.4), libgeom1 (= 7.0), libnvpair0, libumem0, libuutil0, libzfs0, libzpool0, zlib1g (= 1:1.1.4) That implies that zfsutils would work with any version of libnvpair0, libumem0, libuutil0, libzfs0, libzpool0 installed. That is, however not true. Upgrading zfsutils from 8.1 (Squeeze) to 8.2 (Wheezy) or any later version breaks ABIs but does not pull appropriate dependencies. Thus, users which do not do a full upgrade are left with broken zfsutils: root@kfreebsd-test2:~# ldd /sbin/zfs libzfs.so.0 = /lib/libzfs.so.0 (0x000801242000) libgeom.so.0 = /lib/libgeom.so.0 (0x000801479000) libnvpair.so.0 = /lib/libnvpair.so.0 (0x00080167e000) libuutil.so.0 = /lib/libuutil.so.0 (0x000801888000) libc.so.0.1 = /lib/libc.so.0.1 (0x000801a92000) libbsd.so.0 = /lib/libbsd.so.0 (0x000801dd6000) libm.so.1 = /lib/libm.so.1 (0x000801fe) libexpat.so.1 = /usr/lib/libexpat.so.1 (0x000802262000) libsbuf.so.0 = /lib/libsbuf.so.0 (0x00080248b000) librt.so.1 = /lib/librt.so.1 (0x00080268d000) libpthread.so.0 = /lib/libpthread.so.0 (0x0008028a2000) /lib/ld-kfreebsd-x86-64.so.1 = /lib64/ld-kfreebsd-x86-64.so.1 (0x01021000) root@kfreebsd-test2:~# objdump -x /lib/libzfs.so.0 /lib/libzfs.so.0: file format elf64-x86-64-freebsd /lib/libzfs.so.0 architecture: i386:x86-64, flags 0x0150: HAS_SYMS, DYNAMIC, D_PAGED start address 0x98c0 Dynamic Section: SONAME libzfs.so.0 ... VERNEED 0x5aa0 VERNEEDNUM 0x0003 VERSYM 0x5742 RELACOUNT0x0069 note: no version definitions. Next, let's upgrade zfsutils: root@kfreebsd-test2:~# apt-get install zfsutils Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree Reading state information... Done The following extra packages will be installed: libbsd0 libgeom1 libumem0 libzpool0 The following NEW packages will be installed: libgeom1 libumem0 libzpool0 The following packages will be upgraded: libbsd0 zfsutils 2 upgraded, 3 newly installed, 0 to remove and 140 not upgraded. Need to get 653 kB of archives. ... (Reading database ... 12078 files and directories currently installed.) Preparing to replace libbsd0 0.2.0-1 (using .../libbsd0_0.3.0-1_kfreebsd-amd64.deb) ... Unpacking replacement libbsd0 ... Setting up libbsd0 (0.3.0-1) ... Selecting previously deselected package libgeom1. (Reading database ... 12078 files and directories currently installed.) Unpacking libgeom1 (from .../libgeom1_8.2+ds1-4_kfreebsd-amd64.deb) ... Selecting previously deselected package libumem0. Unpacking libumem0 (from .../libumem0_8.2-4_kfreebsd-amd64.deb) ... Selecting previously deselected package libzpool0. Unpacking libzpool0 (from .../libzpool0_8.2-4_kfreebsd-amd64.deb) ... Preparing to replace zfsutils 8.1-4+squeeze1 (using .../zfsutils_8.2-4_kfreebsd-amd64.deb) ... Unpacking replacement zfsutils ... Processing triggers for man-db ... Setting up libgeom1 (8.2+ds1-4) ... Setting up libumem0 (8.2-4) ... Setting up libzpool0 (8.2-4) ... Setting up zfsutils (8.2-4) ... Installing new version of config file /etc/init.d/zfs ... Starting ZFS subsystem... zvol swapzfs: symbol lookup error: zfs: undefined symbol: libzfs_mnttab_cache filesystemszfs: symbol lookup error: zfs: undefined symbol: libzfs_mnttab_cache failed! invoke-rc.d: initscript zfs, action start failed. dpkg: error processing zfsutils (--configure): subprocess installed post-installation script returned error exit status 127 configured to not write apport reports Errors were encountered while processing: zfsutils E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1) Problem is, root@kfreebsd-test2:~# zfs list zfs: symbol lookup error: zfs: undefined symbol: libzfs_mnttab_cache This symbol is defined in libzfs built from the zfsutils 8.2 source package though: root@kfreebsd-test2:~# apt-get install libzfs0 Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree Reading state information... Done The following packages will be upgraded: libzfs0 1 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 139 not upgraded. 1 not fully installed or removed. Need to get 105 kB of archives. After this operation, 13.3 kB disk space will be freed. Get:1 http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/ wheezy/main libzfs0 kfreebsd-amd64 8.2-4 [105 kB] Fetched 105 kB in 0s (256 kB/s) (Reading database ... 12094 files and directories currently installed.)
Re: Please test zfsutils 9.0~svn226163-1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14.10.2011 07:21, Robert Millan wrote: I'm sure, but note 8-STABLE != 8.2.0-RELEASE. I'm talking about the stable/8 branch, which will become 8.3.0-RELEASE. whoops, sorry for the confusion then. It'd be interesting to know if 8-STABLE version has the same ABI problems. Yes. I reported and outlined this in #645305. - -- with kind regards, Arno Töll IRC: daemonkeeper on Freenode/OFTC GnuPG Key-ID: 0x9D80F36D -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJOl/4wAAoJEMcrUe6dgPNteGcP/2Ig+3c8oBqWOF/llMtolFNr WALxaGswkQGvTbfXqUw4ShfK0gRctigaKxeKxEWecfoEJbe1vT2kU3UqIeBYkqtK ToEnhGBW3NAcEpfsqNV3Co5F8RWCFgrGhLTfwH9XXiNPIVzVNJrF+5ukGrVpBSn8 cJPpR+TuxPu2V0wigr1MeinlYChH7IBosxDfkLS1TX6IbyeFuVZ8+I4Vv+uzCiAL iLApyVR5OggSWXH3PSpsHTBtEJigIL7YQi3z8zdndRC+affPP00zHlGYj3sGJuoW v3rePjRd4Z9ymrn14jgKjH9qwQd9x5XaxIvBGH+EHxJ80az2Yma5vVlmOim2+5JC wMR8L4VPNDsQw5J93Umk5cLaGqMpz5OAIZa+IzSouJ+PWoasI3uocVhFT9uAp7Gt sE+AECrNmt8lIbqoEGglY7PSe89OBuap6wNHCj/exV72fI2bpY/bNdPJw67zOnxr 9HkGtfZ0cRM2Eek/3l740ACf8YvH2NP3wAxf9zMNKBl5XJLw/0DJwWlecbDTELMU IZuIXhFrb74NwK770oNkW14OY7eF716/RRXTcvWqwBVftCXy3GS2r1X3UvtNXuyd BlgNunaVEIqU5WG9A23O/wvhpTHGcDKbUu1puJYu2RqNiWTuIl7OWpvP7V9Fc3ZH B4gGyFky22OAs5B9ZnX6 =a+Qa -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4e97fe30.1000...@toell.net
Re: [pkg-wpa-devel] Bug#644823: uninstallable on kfreebsd-* (depends on uninstallable libpcap0.8 from non-udeb land)
2011/10/14 Stefan Lippers-Hollmann s@gmx.de: It would be great if you could sponsor that upload, as I can only try to contact our regular sponsor this evening. Done. In the meantime we could file a wishlist request to libpcap maintainer? I don't have time to prepare a patch but maybe he's willing to help. I will file a wishlist bug against libpcap, hopefully with a build- tested patch, over the weekend. Cool, thanks. -- Robert Millan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/caofdtxpuiy-g74ip+sfezpjmmabtmvw4g9k3ms+106advhw...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Please test zfsutils 9.0~svn226163-1
On Mon, 2011-10-10 at 01:35:36 +0200, Arno Töll wrote: * We could get rid of the last delta in 01_glibc_kludge.diff and the whole (hacky and ugly) 16-wrap-cdefs.diff if kfreebsd-kernel-headers would export cdefs.h like it does upstream [2]. As Petr has said sys/cdefs.h is already exported by eglibc, the only issue I see here is that our kernel headers [0] do not match what's expected from them by eglibc ones, so we should fix those because this affects *all* software using specific features and their visibility, I don't think it's reasonable for every package to use libbsd-dev to workaround this. [0] Some of the affected headers seem to be (grepped for _VISIBLE): /usr/include/sys/limits.h /usr/include/sys/timespec.h /usr/include/machine-*/endian.h /usr/include/machine-*/float.h /usr/include/machine-*/setjmp.h /usr/include/machine-*/signal.h /usr/include/machine-*/stdarg.h regards, guillem -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20111014223318.gb20...@gaara.hadrons.org
Bug#645377: kfreebsd-8: Buffer overflow in handling of UNIX socket addresses
package: kfreebsd-8 version: 8.1 severity: serious tag: security , patch A buffer overflow issue in kfreebsd has been disclosed [0] along with a poc [1]. patch is available [2]. I've only checked the kfreebsd-8 source, but the description says -7 is affected, and 9- and higher may be as well; I haven't checked those. Best wishes, Mike [0] http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/519864/30/0/threaded [1] http://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/17908/ [2] http://security.freebsd.org/patches/SA-11:05/unix.patch -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20111015001032.019d32c30b117e74e4e4f...@gmail.com
