SSH: zombie appearse probably related to PAM

2002-04-20 Thread Andrey A. Chernov
WARNING: this bug present even _before_ my changes, tested with session.c v1.22 It happens only with 'localhost' and not in remote case. To reproduce it, call: ssh localhost login normally and then exit. At exit you'll see following message on console (or /var/log/messages):

SSH: login record not present (PAM)

2002-04-20 Thread Andrey A. Chernov
WARNING: this bug appearse even _before_ my changes, I test it with session.c v1.22 When you log in, locally or remotely, login record not added, logged user is invisible for 'w' or 'who'. Of course, !use_login assumed. Yes, I have updated /etc/pam.d Please fix it. Perhaps it somehow related

Re: savecore

2002-04-20 Thread Giorgos Keramidas
On 2002-04-19 21:00, Chad David wrote: I was actually hoping for a few more comments on the code, but thanks anyway ;). Nah... Most of the code looks OK, as far as I can tell. I'm not a C guru or something similar, but it is fine. Style things like the two below were what I had written

Re: SSH: login record not present (PAM)

2002-04-20 Thread Dag-Erling Smorgrav
Andrey A. Chernov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: When you log in, locally or remotely, login record not added, logged user is invisible for 'w' or 'who'. Of course, !use_login assumed. Yes, I have updated /etc/pam.d Please fix it. I postd a patch to -current yesterday. DES -- Dag-Erling

Re: SSH: LOGIN_CAP limits ~/.login.conf not processed now

2002-04-20 Thread Dag-Erling Smorgrav
Andrey A. Chernov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: NOTE: I just commit the fix, see session.c commit log for detailed explanation. Andrey, in the future please *submit patches for review*. DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with

Re: SSH: LOGIN_CAP limits ~/.login.conf not processed now

2002-04-20 Thread Andrey A. Chernov
On Sat, Apr 20, 2002 at 17:12:21 +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: Andrey A. Chernov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: NOTE: I just commit the fix, see session.c commit log for detailed explanation. Andrey, in the future please *submit patches for review*. This case is special - that was old

Re: PAM OpenSSH: two incorrect last login

2002-04-20 Thread Andrey A. Chernov
This bug still present too. Please handle it somehow, it is clearly comes from PAM. On Sat, Apr 20, 2002 at 05:16:35 +0400, Andrey A. Chernov wrote: I got this TWO last login lines with recent -current SSH+PAM: -- Last login: Sat Apr 20 04:50:45 from

Re: SSH: zombie appearse probably related to PAM

2002-04-20 Thread Andrey A. Chernov
This one still present, libutil/login.c commit not fix it. On Sat, Apr 20, 2002 at 14:19:55 +0400, Andrey A. Chernov wrote: WARNING: this bug present even _before_ my changes, tested with session.c v1.22 It happens only with 'localhost' and not in remote case. To reproduce it, call:

Re: PAM OpenSSH: two incorrect last login

2002-04-20 Thread Dag-Erling Smorgrav
Andrey A. Chernov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: This bug still present too. Please handle it somehow, it is clearly comes from PAM. Andrey, it's quite possible that you're Superman, but I'm not, so GIVE ME A BREAK. I'm doing this one step at a time. It'll happen much faster if you stay off my

Re: PAM OpenSSH: two incorrect last login

2002-04-20 Thread Andrey A. Chernov
On Sat, Apr 20, 2002 at 18:01:58 +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: Andrey A. Chernov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: This bug still present too. Please handle it somehow, it is clearly comes from PAM. Andrey, it's quite possible that you're Superman, but I'm not, so GIVE ME A BREAK. I'm

Re: PAM OpenSSH: two incorrect last login

2002-04-20 Thread Dag-Erling Smorgrav
Andrey A. Chernov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I got this TWO last login lines with recent -current SSH+PAM: See attached patch. DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED] //depot/user/des/pam/lib/libpam/modules/pam_lastlog/pam_lastlog.c#9 -

Re: PAM OpenSSH: two incorrect last login

2002-04-20 Thread Andrey A. Chernov
On Sat, Apr 20, 2002 at 18:10:50 +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: Andrey A. Chernov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I got this TWO last login lines with recent -current SSH+PAM: See attached patch. It goes better and worse in the same time :-) Last login: Sat Apr 20 20:16:55 on ttyv4 Last

Re: PAM OpenSSH: two incorrect last login

2002-04-20 Thread Andrey A. Chernov
On Sat, Apr 20, 2002 at 20:20:01 +0400, Andrey A. Chernov wrote: Newlines are gone, but see second line from back 1991 (garbadge on the stack of 'last_login_time' variable). BTW, please notice that printing this line is very conditionalized in OpenSSH: options.print_lastlog command ==

alpha tinderbox failure

2002-04-20 Thread Dag-Erling Smorgrav
=== usr.bin/enigma === usr.bin/env === usr.bin/expand === usr.bin/false === usr.bin/fetch === usr.bin/file === usr.bin/file2c === usr.bin/find === usr.bin/finger === usr.bin/fmt === usr.bin/fold === usr.bin/from === usr.bin/fstat In file included from

Re: Xfree86-4 problem

2002-04-20 Thread Kris Kennaway
On Sat, Apr 20, 2002 at 12:02:11AM +0200, John Angelmo wrote: Kris Kennaway wrote: On Fri, Apr 19, 2002 at 10:13:23PM +0200, John Angelmo wrote: After yesterdays new build I found a problem Xfree86-4 can't start as regular user (exept root) Read the fine message you got at

Re: Xfree86-4 problem

2002-04-20 Thread Kris Kennaway
On Fri, Apr 19, 2002 at 08:56:50PM -0700, James Satterfield wrote: I've found that wrapper needs to be updated with XFree86-4. wrapper always needs to be rebuilt when you update X, yes. Kris msg37453/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature

Re: Xfree86-4 problem

2002-04-20 Thread John Angelmo
Kris Kennaway wrote: On Sat, Apr 20, 2002 at 12:02:11AM +0200, John Angelmo wrote: Kris Kennaway wrote: On Fri, Apr 19, 2002 at 10:13:23PM +0200, John Angelmo wrote: After yesterdays new build I found a problem Xfree86-4 can't start as regular user (exept root) Read the fine message you

Re: Xfree86-4 problem

2002-04-20 Thread Brooks Davis
On Sat, Apr 20, 2002 at 10:39:22PM +0200, John Angelmo wrote: Well X starts but just to the gray area, no windowmanager starts and the error I get(after I have exited) is: AUDIT: Fri Apr 19 22:09:13 2002: 16472 XFree86: client 1 rejected from local host AUDIT: Fri Apr 19 22:09:15 2002:

Re: Adding a 'bpf' group for /dev/bpf*

2002-04-20 Thread Crist J. Clark
On Sat, Apr 20, 2002 at 03:39:14PM -0600, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: For the benefit of packet sniffers and other things that only want read-only access to /dev/bpf*, what do people think of adding a 'bpf' group for those programs? This allows bpf devices to be read by programs running with an

Re: Adding a 'bpf' group for /dev/bpf*

2002-04-20 Thread Crist J. Clark
On Sat, Apr 20, 2002 at 04:02:13PM -0600, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: Crist == Crist J Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Crist I do this a lot too on systems where it makes sense. But I'm Crist not sure I understand what you are asking to be done. Is it Crist asking too much of an

FreeBSD 4.5-STABLE not easily scalable to large servers ... ?

2002-04-20 Thread Marc G. Fournier
Over the past week, I've been trying to get information on how to fix a server that panics with: | panic: vm_map_entry_create: kernel resources exhausted | mp_lock = 0101; cpuid = 1; lapic.id = 0100 | boot() called on cpu#1 Great ... but, how do I determine what 'resources' I need to

Re: Adding a 'bpf' group for /dev/bpf*

2002-04-20 Thread Lyndon Nerenberg
Crist == Crist J Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Crist OK. Now you've really lost me. What do ports have to do with Crist this? Which ports? None of the sniffing programs I am aware Crist of use set{g,u}id bits. They rely on the permissions of the Crist user running them.

uthread_init.c again

2002-04-20 Thread Oswald Buddenhagen
hello, this is again about the _thread_kern_pipe issue raised a few days ago. thinking about it again, it's nonsense to create any pid-specific workarounds by creating fake stdio. the solution is straightforward; patch attached (completely untested). note, that the open() wrapper (and other

Re: FreeBSD 4.5-STABLE not easily scalable to large servers ... ?

2002-04-20 Thread Marc G. Fournier
As a quick follow-up to this, doing more searching on the web, I came across a few suggested 'sysctl' settings, which I've added to what I had before, for a total of: kern.maxfiles=65534 jail.sysvipc_allowed=1 vm.swap_idle_enabled=1 vfs.vmiodirenable=1 kern.ipc.somaxconn=4096 I've also just

Re: FreeBSD 4.5-STABLE not easily scalable to large servers ... ?

2002-04-20 Thread Alfred Perlstein
* The Hermit Hacker [EMAIL PROTECTED] [020420 16:01] wrote: As a quick follow-up to this, doing more searching on the web, I came across a few suggested 'sysctl' settings, which I've added to what I had before, for a total of: kern.maxfiles=65534 jail.sysvipc_allowed=1

Re: savecore

2002-04-20 Thread Bill Fenner
Yes, I'm in favor of going back to the simple sequence number too. I don't understand the advantage of the MD5. While you're in there, could you put back minfree checking too? That bit me pretty badly today, with savecore filling up my /var because it doesn't care about minfree. Bill To

Re: FreeBSD 4.5-STABLE not easily scalable to large servers ... ?

2002-04-20 Thread Marc G. Fournier
On Sat, 20 Apr 2002, Alfred Perlstein wrote: * The Hermit Hacker [EMAIL PROTECTED] [020420 16:01] wrote: As a quick follow-up to this, doing more searching on the web, I came across a few suggested 'sysctl' settings, which I've added to what I had before, for a total of:

Re: FreeBSD 4.5-STABLE not easily scalable to large servers ... ?

2002-04-20 Thread Terry Lambert
Marc G. Fournier wrote: Over the past week, I've been trying to get information on how to fix a server that panics with: | panic: vm_map_entry_create: kernel resources exhausted | mp_lock = 0101; cpuid = 1; lapic.id = 0100 | boot() called on cpu#1 Great ... but, how do I

Re: FreeBSD 4.5-STABLE not easily scalable to large servers ... ?

2002-04-20 Thread Terry Lambert
Marc G. Fournier wrote: It'll only work if you set it before your processes setup. Some more information about what these 5000 processes are doing would help. Sorry ... the server is running ~210 jails ... so the '5k processes' would be when they all start up their periodic scripts

Re: FreeBSD 4.5-STABLE not easily scalable to large servers ... ?

2002-04-20 Thread Marc G. Fournier
On Sat, 20 Apr 2002, Terry Lambert wrote: Marc G. Fournier wrote: Over the past week, I've been trying to get information on how to fix a server that panics with: | panic: vm_map_entry_create: kernel resources exhausted | mp_lock = 0101; cpuid = 1; lapic.id = 0100 | boot()

Re: Adding a 'bpf' group for /dev/bpf*

2002-04-20 Thread Crist J. Clark
On Sat, Apr 20, 2002 at 04:27:18PM -0600, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: Crist == Crist J Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Crist OK. Now you've really lost me. What do ports have to do with Crist this? Which ports? None of the sniffing programs I am aware Crist of use set{g,u}id bits.

Re: Adding a 'bpf' group for /dev/bpf*

2002-04-20 Thread Craig Boston
Crist J. Clark wrote: These are actually very different in that they are set{u,g}id commands (well, ps(1) is not set{u,g}id anymore and is root:wheel owned). The sniffing tools we've been discussing, and pretty much all of the ones I've used, tcpdump(1), snort(8), nmap(1), etc., are not.

Re: uthread_init.c again

2002-04-20 Thread Daniel Eischen
On Sun, 21 Apr 2002, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: hello, this is again about the _thread_kern_pipe issue raised a few days ago. thinking about it again, it's nonsense to create any pid-specific workarounds by creating fake stdio. the solution is straightforward; patch attached (completely

Re: Adding a 'bpf' group for /dev/bpf*

2002-04-20 Thread Doug Barton
On Sat, 20 Apr 2002, Craig Boston wrote: Since -current by default uses devfs, is there a standard way to make the ownership/permissions of device nodes sticky so that they persist across boots? rc.devfs -- We have known freedom's price. We have shown freedom's power. And in this

Re: Xfree86-4 problem

2002-04-20 Thread Steve O'Hara-Smith
On Sat, 20 Apr 2002 13:35:32 -0700 Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: KK wrapper always needs to be rebuilt when you update X, yes. All you really need to do is reset the X symlink (unless you are upgrading from 3 to 4 in which case you need a new wrapper). -- C:WIN