Bakul Shah wrote:
Thank you for explicating the security argument! I'll also
point out that hardwiring module names makes it harder to
experiment with replacement modules (i.e. I may want to
develop if_super_duper_ppp).
Actually, this isn't an issue (I'm assuming that you want it to
be named
Terry Lambert wrote:
Brooks Davis wrote:
This isn't going to have an effect on the ability to use kernel ppp for
other things. The tty orientation of pppd and the outdated, unmodular
design on ppp(4) have taken care of that. This patch gives people
the functionality they want (pppd just
Until pppd is taught to create the interface if one doesn't
exist, this information needs to be in /usr/src/UPDATING.
pppd doesn't need to be taught to create the interface. Rather it needed
to learn to check for ppp support in a non-stupid way. The following
patch should do it as well
On Fri, Oct 25, 2002 at 02:16:32PM -0700, Bakul Shah wrote:
Until pppd is taught to create the interface if one doesn't
exist, this information needs to be in /usr/src/UPDATING.
pppd doesn't need to be taught to create the interface. Rather it needed
to learn to check for ppp support
On Fri, Oct 25, 2002 at 01:43:57PM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote:
It's a moderately common case in -CURRENT, when kernel structure
sizes change, and you build a new kernel without new modules, and
a module refuses to load. It's not technically correct. The old
message might not be either, but
Brooks Davis wrote:
On Fri, Oct 25, 2002 at 01:43:57PM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote:
It's a moderately common case in -CURRENT, when kernel structure
sizes change, and you build a new kernel without new modules, and
a module refuses to load. It's not technically correct. The old
message
On Fri, Oct 25, 2002 at 12:35:22PM -0700, Brooks Davis wrote:
If someone who actually uses pppd could test it, perferably in both
sceneios, I'll see about getting it commited.
Here's a new patch that gives the user more of a hint at how to add PPP
support and only loads the module if they are
Brooks Davis wrote:
On Fri, Oct 25, 2002 at 12:35:22PM -0700, Brooks Davis wrote:
If someone who actually uses pppd could test it, perferably in both
sceneios, I'll see about getting it commited.
Here's a new patch that gives the user more of a hint at how to add PPP
support and only
Here's a new patch that gives the user more of a hint at how to add PPP
support and only loads the module if they are actully root. How's this
look?
I still don't like it. How to explain
I don't think it is pppd's responsibility to muck with
modules. It is like mount kldloading a disk
On Fri, Oct 25, 2002 at 05:34:15PM -0700, Bakul Shah wrote:
Here's a new patch that gives the user more of a hint at how to add PPP
support and only loads the module if they are actully root. How's this
look?
I still don't like it. How to explain
I don't think it is pppd's
Brooks Davis wrote:
This isn't going to have an effect on the ability to use kernel ppp for
other things. The tty orientation of pppd and the outdated, unmodular
design on ppp(4) have taken care of that. This patch gives people
the functionality they want (pppd just working) without any
On Fri, Oct 25, 2002 at 07:05:57PM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote:
Brooks Davis wrote:
This isn't going to have an effect on the ability to use kernel ppp for
other things. The tty orientation of pppd and the outdated, unmodular
design on ppp(4) have taken care of that. This patch gives
On Fri, Oct 25, 2002 at 07:20:33PM -0700, Brooks Davis wrote:
On Fri, Oct 25, 2002 at 07:05:57PM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote:
Depending on the value of sysctl kern.module_path, if the if_ppp
module does not exist, and one of the path components is writeable,
then this would permit you to
From: Terry Lambert [mailto:tlambert2;mindspring.com]
Brooks Davis wrote:
This isn't going to have an effect on the ability to use kernel ppp for
other things. The tty orientation of pppd and the outdated, unmodular
design on ppp(4) have taken care of that. This patch gives people
Brooks Davis wrote:
This isn't going to have an effect on the ability to use kernel ppp for
other things. The tty orientation of pppd and the outdated, unmodular
design on ppp(4) have taken care of that. This patch gives people
the functionality they want (pppd just working) without any
Is anyone using pppd on CURRENT. somewhere between may and October it
seems to have broken. My KERNEL is GENERIC, my sources are dated cvs
-D2002-10-20, but I now get a message about needing facilities in the
kernel. However, the kernel has many ppp entry points, I haven't
modified GENERIC which
On Fri, Oct 25, 2002 at 06:15:55PM +, Dave Evans wrote:
Is anyone using pppd on CURRENT. somewhere between may and October it
seems to have broken. My KERNEL is GENERIC, my sources are dated cvs
-D2002-10-20, but I now get a message about needing facilities in the
kernel. However, the
On Fri, Oct 25, 2002 at 06:15:55PM +, Dave Evans wrote:
Is anyone using pppd on CURRENT. somewhere between may and October it
seems to have broken. My KERNEL is GENERIC, my sources are dated cvs
-D2002-10-20, but I now get a message about needing facilities in the
kernel. However,
On Fri, Oct 25, 2002 at 11:41:33AM -0700, Bakul Shah wrote:
Until pppd is taught to create the interface if one doesn't
exist, this information needs to be in /usr/src/UPDATING.
pppd doesn't need to be taught to create the interface. Rather it needed
to learn to check for ppp support in a
On Fri, 25 Oct 2002, Bakul Shah wrote:
On Fri, Oct 25, 2002 at 06:15:55PM +, Dave Evans wrote:
Is anyone using pppd on CURRENT. somewhere between may and October it
seems to have broken. My KERNEL is GENERIC, my sources are dated cvs
-D2002-10-20, but I now get a message about
Brooks Davis wrote:
pppd doesn't need to be taught to create the interface. Rather it needed
to learn to check for ppp support in a non-stupid way. The following
patch should do it as well as making pppd do the right thing when
support isn't compiled in, but a module is available. It should
On Fri, Oct 25, 2002 at 12:58:57PM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote:
Brooks Davis wrote:
pppd doesn't need to be taught to create the interface. Rather it needed
to learn to check for ppp support in a non-stupid way. The following
patch should do it as well as making pppd do the right thing
On Fri, 25 Oct 2002, Brooks Davis wrote:
On Fri, Oct 25, 2002 at 11:41:33AM -0700, Bakul Shah wrote:
Until pppd is taught to create the interface if one doesn't
exist, this information needs to be in /usr/src/UPDATING.
pppd doesn't need to be taught to create the interface. Rather it
Brooks Davis wrote:
If someone who actually uses pppd could test it, perferably in both
sceneios, I'll see about getting it commited.
Try running you program when the module is there, but fails to load.
You got rid of the failure message that it used to print.
No, it just let the
Bruce Evans wrote:
patch should do it as well as making pppd do the right thing when
support isn't compiled in, but a module is available. It should make
things work with a GENERIC kernel.
I disagree with auto-loading of modules for anything, but especially in
setuid programs like pppd.
25 matches
Mail list logo
