[Please Cc: me on reply]
Hello,
I have 2 questions:
- where in code should I search for icmp socket binding prohibition in
jail?;
- what bad consequences will appear if I remove those checks and
prohibition?.
Thanks in advance!
--
NEVE-RIPE, will build world for food
Ukrainian
Hi!
We had a bug in our threaded application that would mistakenly close
the descriptor 0, and this triggers a bug in libc_r which I will try
to describe below.
The bug (in libc_r only, libpthread^Wlibkse is unaffected) causes a
threaded application to stuck in accept(2). libc_r makes every new
On Fri, May 30, 2003 at 05:35:41PM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
We had a bug in our threaded application that would mistakenly close
the descriptor 0, and this triggers a bug in libc_r which I will try
to describe below.
...
Some important notes: this bug is only applicable to descriptors
0 -
On Fri, 30 May 2003, Enache Adrian wrote:
On Fri, May 30, 2003 at 05:35:41PM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
We had a bug in our threaded application that would mistakenly close
the descriptor 0, and this triggers a bug in libc_r which I will try
to describe below.
...
Some important
On Thu, 29 May 2003, [iso-8859-1] Thorsten Futrega wrote:
Dear users,
The most important changes I'm going to commit today:
- Remove gcc and replace it with a new TenDRA
snapshot.
yay! but what about c++ support?
- Remove GNU tar.
double yay!
- Fix httpd.ko to make it work on buggy
On Fri, 30 May 2003, Narvi wrote:
[snip]
Ahem.. i am very embarrassed about having sent the reply, everybody please
pretend I was nowhere near the thread, pretty please?
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
On Fri, May 30, 2003 at 07:07:23PM +0300, Enache Adrian wrote:
On Fri, May 30, 2003 at 05:35:41PM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
We had a bug in our threaded application that would mistakenly close
the descriptor 0, and this triggers a bug in libc_r which I will try
to describe below.
...
at http://www.tel.fer.hr/zec/vimage/ you can find a set of patches
against 4.8-RELEASE kernel that provide support for network stack
cloning. The patched kernel allows multiple fully independent
network stack instances to simultaneously coexist within a single OS
kernel, providing a
* Sean Chittenden [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ Date: 2003-05-30 ]
[ w.r.t. Re: Network stack cloning / virtualization patches ]
at http://www.tel.fer.hr/zec/vimage/ you can find a set of patches
against 4.8-RELEASE kernel that provide support for network stack
cloning. The patched kernel
On Fri, May 30, 2003 at 08:16:41PM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
On Fri, May 30, 2003 at 07:07:23PM +0300, Enache Adrian wrote:
On Fri, May 30, 2003 at 05:35:41PM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
We had a bug in our threaded application that would mistakenly close
the descriptor 0, and this
This has been discussed at length. Search the archives of this mailing
list (or maybe it was freebsd-security) for interesting insight. Sure
set me straight as to the consequences
Nate
- Original Message -
From: Alexandr Kovalenko [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, May
Juli Mallett wrote:
* Sean Chittenden [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ Date: 2003-05-30 ]
[ w.r.t. Re: Network stack cloning / virtualization patches ]
at http://www.tel.fer.hr/zec/vimage/ you can find a set of patches
against 4.8-RELEASE kernel that provide support for network stack
Sean Chittenden wrote:
can it be broken down into a smaller set of commits?
No it can't. That's probably the biggest problem with the network stack
cloning concept - you can either properly virtualize the entire stack or do
no virtualization at all. Therefore even if I ever succeed in bringing
Hello,
It involves allowing all applications inside the jail access to raw sockets.
Raw sockets are also responsible
for ipfw and other services; therefore, it may be prudent to add separate
sysctl settings allowing/denying
access to those. I have a patch that does allow raw sockets and allows
After a reboot on 4.8 I ended up with a degraded raid 5 partition...
The only thing special about my setup is 4944 drives spread over 3 channels,
running SMP kernel.
One sub disk was down and the and the drive was referenced... in scouring the
mailing lists I saw where a referenced
On Fri, May 30, 2003 at 10:07:07PM +0200, Marko Zec wrote:
I plan to start porting the cloning code to -CURRENT once it becomes -STABLE
(that means once the 5.2 gets out, I guess).
FreeBSD has a policy that all new features must be added to -CURRENT
before they can be added to -STABLE (4.x or
On Thursday 29 May 2003 00:12, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Bruce M Simpson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
However, we're dealing with something a bit more stable in terms of
code base, anyway. Having to commit a whole bunch of fixes for the
sake of a compiler upgrade isn't acceptable. Sounds like
Wes Peters [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thursday 29 May 2003 00:12, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
May I remind you that KR-style declarations have been deprecated for
the last 14 years?
Funny, the last time I looked at a C language specification they were
still supported.
6.11.5
I've recently set up a diskless client and I noticed something.
subnet mask 255.255.255.0 router 192.168.1.2 rootfs
192.168.1.100:/export/photon.freebsd/root
swapfs 192.168.1.100:/export/photon.freebsd hostname photon
Adjusted interface xl0
md_lookup_swap: Swap size is 131072 KB
Mounting root
On Fri, 30 May 2003, David Yeske wrote:
$ swapinfo
Device 1K-blocks UsedAvail Capacity Type
Everything looks normal except for swapinfo. It looks like nfs swapping
is broken?
`man swapinfo` says:
BUGS
Does not understand NFS swap servers.
--
:{ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Friday, 30 May 2003 at 18:21:53 -0400, Michael G. Jung wrote:
After a reboot on 4.8 I ended up with a degraded raid 5 partition...
The only thing special about my setup is 4944 drives spread over 3 channels,
running SMP kernel.
That's a lot of drives.
One sub disk was down and
On Fri, 30 May 2003, Juli Mallett wrote:
Has anyone looked at making the patch work with CURRENT? Does this do
anything to degrade performance of UP systems with no (0?) virtualised
images running?
I have been running tests between two machines with this patch
installed. There is a per
Just curious,
anyone know what the proper behavior for wait() is when SIGCHLD
is ignored? Is it simply undefined? Don't see anything mentioned
in the wait(2) manpage one way or tother, and other OSes don't seem
to agree much.
-Paul.
bash$ cat wait.c
#include sys/types.h
#include sys/wait.h
Wes Peters wrote:
On Thursday 29 May 2003 00:12, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
May I remind you that KR-style declarations have been deprecated for
the last 14 years?
Funny, the last time I looked at a C language specification they were
still supported.
Give it up.
You and I learned C when
Fri, May 30, 2003 at 22:00:18, pherman (Paul Herman) wrote about Proper behaviour
for wait()?:
PH anyone know what the proper behavior for wait() is when SIGCHLD
PH is ignored? Is it simply undefined? Don't see anything mentioned
PH in the wait(2) manpage one way or tother, and other OSes
Valentin Nechayev [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Essential words are understriked. I can't imagine how it can be read
as unsupported.
I didn't use the word unsupported, I said deprecated.
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
[EMAIL
Sat, May 31, 2003 at 11:19:06, des (Dag-Erling Smorgrav) wrote about Re: gcc bug?
Openoffice port impossibel to compile on 4.8:
Essential words are understriked. I can't imagine how it can be read
as unsupported.
DES I didn't use the word unsupported, I said deprecated.
Yes. But your
27 matches
Mail list logo
