Re: opendnssec and softhsm revisited

On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 11:34:46PM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote: > On 2015/10/05 22:22, Patrik Lundin wrote: > > The 1.4.8.2 version of opendnssec was just released. This version > > incorporates the above mentioned fixes. You will find the port attached. > > Looks good to me. I've reserved

Re: opendnssec and softhsm revisited

Hi, Patrik Lundin writes: > On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 11:34:46PM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote: >> On 2015/10/05 22:22, Patrik Lundin wrote: >> > The 1.4.8.2 version of opendnssec was just released. This version >> > incorporates the above mentioned fixes. You will find the

Re: opendnssec and softhsm revisited

On 2015/10/05 22:22, Patrik Lundin wrote: > The 1.4.8.2 version of opendnssec was just released. This version > incorporates the above mentioned fixes. You will find the port attached. Looks good to me. I've reserved uid/gid 757 so PLIST can be updated. Only one thing I'm unsure about, I'd

Re: opendnssec and softhsm revisited

On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 11:24:12AM +0200, Patrik Lundin wrote: > > Just a quick update: both the segfault on i386 and the lockup on macppc > has been fixed on the development branch. > > I'll send an updated port as soon as the fixes are available in a > release which may be out in the upcoming

Re: opendnssec and softhsm revisited

On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 11:32:24PM +0200, Jérémie Courrèges-Anglas wrote: > > Very nice! Yes, asking upstream is the right thing to do. > > If they don't plan to do a release with that stack size problem > addressed, I think it would be ok to import opendnssec with a temporary > patch. > Just

Re: opendnssec and softhsm revisited

Patrik Lundin pat...@sigterm.se writes: On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 07:10:33AM +0200, Patrik Lundin wrote: The summary for now looks like this: Working: amd64, sparc64 Broken: i386, macppc Is there some relation between threading and 32/64 bit? It is the main thing that sticks out

Re: opendnssec and softhsm revisited

On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 07:10:33AM +0200, Patrik Lundin wrote: The summary for now looks like this: Working: amd64, sparc64 Broken: i386, macppc Is there some relation between threading and 32/64 bit? It is the main thing that sticks out currently, since sparc64 rules out an endian issue

Re: opendnssec and softhsm revisited

On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 05:25:52PM +0200, Patrik Lundin wrote: I did not see the problem on amd64 or sparc64 at least. I am currently building stuff on a fresh macppc snapshot to see what happens there. After that I am out of platforms :). So this is interesting. It turns out ods has

Re: opendnssec and softhsm revisited

Stuart Henderson st...@openbsd.org writes: On 2015/06/22 13:24, Jérémie Courrèges-Anglas wrote: Stuart Henderson st...@openbsd.org writes: [...] 2. The i386 problems are a bit concerning, it seems quite unlikely that they will only affect i386. I'll take a look at them this

Re: opendnssec and softhsm revisited

On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 09:22:41AM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote: 2. The i386 problems are a bit concerning, it seems quite unlikely that they will only affect i386. I did not see the problem on amd64 or sparc64 at least. I am currently building stuff on a fresh macppc snapshot to see what

Re: opendnssec and softhsm revisited

On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 01:24:35PM +0200, Jérémie Courrèges-Anglas wrote: Stuart Henderson st...@openbsd.org writes: 2. The i386 problems are a bit concerning, it seems quite unlikely that they will only affect i386. I'll take a look at them this evening, had to update my i386 box.

Re: opendnssec and softhsm revisited

Patrik Lundin pat...@sigterm.se writes: On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 01:24:35PM +0200, Jérémie Courrèges-Anglas wrote: Stuart Henderson st...@openbsd.org writes: 2. The i386 problems are a bit concerning, it seems quite unlikely that they will only affect i386. I'll take a look at them this

Re: opendnssec and softhsm revisited

On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 11:11:05PM +0200, Jérémie Courrèges-Anglas wrote: That's what I used, and I can easily reproduce the problem. Sadly the core file doesn't help me much in finding the cause of the segfault, and when running under gdb ods-signerd just spins endlessly. Sucks... Yeah

Re: opendnssec and softhsm revisited

On 2015/06/22 13:24, Jérémie Courrèges-Anglas wrote: Stuart Henderson st...@openbsd.org writes: [...] 2. The i386 problems are a bit concerning, it seems quite unlikely that they will only affect i386. I'll take a look at them this evening, had to update my i386 box. softhsm is

Re: opendnssec and softhsm revisited

Stuart Henderson st...@openbsd.org writes: [...] 2. The i386 problems are a bit concerning, it seems quite unlikely that they will only affect i386. I'll take a look at them this evening, had to update my i386 box. softhsm is probably easier to test so let's look at that first. I'm fairly

Re: opendnssec and softhsm revisited

On 2015/06/21 05:58, Patrik Lundin wrote: On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 08:57:35AM +0200, Patrik Lundin wrote: On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 08:23:49PM +0200, Patrik Lundin wrote: On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 06:24:11PM +0200, Patrik Lundin wrote: You will find the latest ports attached. Except for

Re: opendnssec and softhsm revisited

On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 08:57:35AM +0200, Patrik Lundin wrote: On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 08:23:49PM +0200, Patrik Lundin wrote: On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 06:24:11PM +0200, Patrik Lundin wrote: You will find the latest ports attached. Except for marking opendnssec broken on i386 I have

Re: opendnssec and softhsm revisited

On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 08:23:49PM +0200, Patrik Lundin wrote: On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 06:24:11PM +0200, Patrik Lundin wrote: You will find the latest ports attached. Except for marking opendnssec broken on i386 I have also updated the version from 1.4.6 to 1.4.7, and I have converted

Re: opendnssec and softhsm revisited

On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 06:24:11PM +0200, Patrik Lundin wrote: You will find the latest ports attached. Except for marking opendnssec broken on i386 I have also updated the version from 1.4.6 to 1.4.7, and I have converted databases/mysql dependencies to databases/mariadb. Since there

Re: opendnssec and softhsm revisited

Hello again! I have now been updating the ports for both opendnssec and softhsm to the latest versions (opendnssec 1.4.6 and softhsm 1.3.7). While doing this I extended my testing from amd64/sparc64 to i386. Sadly this revealed a segfault in ods-signerd (which was present in 1.4.5 as well).

Re: opendnssec and softhsm revisited

On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 09:48:41AM +0200, Patrik Lundin wrote: Is no one interested in this? I think it is a nice complement to nsd in base for automated DNSSEC. I have now been updating the ports for both opendnssec and softhsm to the latest versions (opendnssec 1.4.6 and softhsm 1.3.7).

Re: opendnssec and softhsm revisited

On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 10:27:52PM +0200, Patrik Lundin wrote: The ports are now at a state where i feel they are suitable for import. Is no one interested in this? I think it is a nice complement to nsd in base for automated DNSSEC. Regards, Patrik Lundin

Re: opendnssec and softhsm revisited

Hello, The ports are now at a state where i feel they are suitable for import. Some remaining questions: * Do people agree daemon is the correct syslog facility to use? The upstream manual recommends the use of the localX ones. (Noted on this page:

Re: opendnssec and softhsm revisited

On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 11:55:33PM +0200, Jérémie Courrèges-Anglas wrote: It is not about this particular occurrence. If you replace it by a strlcpy call, you will probably see the same warning, coming from another strcpy call elsewhere. Propose upstream strl* and snprintf as alternatives

Re: opendnssec and softhsm revisited

On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 07:24:00PM +0200, Patrik Lundin wrote: First up is this one: === pin.c: In function 'hsm_shm_open': pin.c:209: warning: comparison between signed and unsigned === Next we have this one: === hsmspeed.c:38:1: warning: PTHREAD_THREADS_MAX redefined In file

Re: opendnssec and softhsm revisited

Patrik Lundin patrik.lundin@gmail.com writes: On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 07:24:00PM +0200, Patrik Lundin wrote: First up is this one: === pin.c: In function 'hsm_shm_open': pin.c:209: warning: comparison between signed and unsigned === Next we have this one: === hsmspeed.c:38:1:

Re: opendnssec and softhsm revisited

On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 10:57:50PM +0200, Patrik Lundin wrote: The opendnssec port is a work in progress. The most annoying thing while building currently is the warnings regarding comma at end of enumerator list which seems to be the result of inconsistent use of -std=c99 which i am not

Re: opendnssec and softhsm revisited

This is due to differences between C compilers. gcc 4.8 and clang don't warn for this with -pedantic, gcc 4.2.1 does. I think -pedantic is fairly pointless in ports and should be removed, but I would also report it to nlnetlabs as an ldns bug, I think the best approach would be to remove the

Re: opendnssec and softhsm revisited

On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 11:04:19AM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote: This is due to differences between C compilers. gcc 4.8 and clang don't warn for this with -pedantic, gcc 4.2.1 does. I think -pedantic is fairly pointless in ports and should be removed, but I would also report it to

Re: opendnssec and softhsm revisited

On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 01:24:11PM +0200, Patrik Lundin wrote: I guess I will have to look into how to disabled -pedantic in the build then. Disabling -pedantic was easy to do at configure time, using --disable-pedantic. Now I have started looking at the remaining warnings. I am constantly

Re: opendnssec and softhsm revisited

On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 11:23:52PM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote: Some quick comments from a read-through of the files (but not building/testing yet) :- opendnssec README: - should follow style from ports/infrastructure/templates/README.template I have updated the README to reflect

Re: opendnssec and softhsm revisited

On 2014/05/07 22:57, Patrik Lundin wrote: Hello, I thought I would take a second look at porting opendnssec and softhsm since last time my softhsm adventure grinded to a halt due to libtool issues (http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-portsm=137054816021002w=2). The attached softhsm port is based