On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 09:05:19AM +0200, Nicolas Joly wrote:
> Adding the following to the testcase header should do the trick:
>
>atf_tc_set_md_var(tc,"require.user","unprivileged");
>
> In that case, if run as root, it will lower its privileges to the
> unprivileged user _atf before ru
On 04.04.2011 23:21, Taylor R Campbell wrote:
>Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 23:21:39 +
>From: "Jean-Yves Migeon"
>
>Now that pkgsrc-2011Q1 has arrived, and before -6 chimes in, change
>ifxname for xvif(4) from xvif%d.%d to xvif%d-%d. This is needed
>to avoid sysctl(9) EINVAL erro
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 23:21:39 +
From: "Jean-Yves Migeon"
Now that pkgsrc-2011Q1 has arrived, and before -6 chimes in, change
ifxname for xvif(4) from xvif%d.%d to xvif%d-%d. This is needed
to avoid sysctl(9) EINVAL errors when creating interface nodes.
This change came awfull
On Mon, 4 Apr 2011, Alan Barrett wrote:
> On Mon, 04 Apr 2011, Iain Hibbert wrote:
> > Modified Files:
> > src/lib/libbluetooth: sdp_get.c
> >
> > Log Message:
> > handle overflowed values correctly,
> > also put a compile time guard to warn if INTMAX won't fit in INT64
> > (all our ports curr
On Mon, 04 Apr 2011, Iain Hibbert wrote:
Modified Files:
src/lib/libbluetooth: sdp_get.c
Log Message:
handle overflowed values correctly,
also put a compile time guard to warn if INTMAX won't fit in INT64
(all our ports currently have INTMAX = INT64)
The actual code tests
#if INTMA
On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 10:18:52AM +0300, Jukka Ruohonen wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 09:05:19AM +0200, Nicolas Joly wrote:
> > Adding the following to the testcase header should do the trick:
> >
> >atf_tc_set_md_var(tc,"require.user","unprivileged");
> >
> > In that case, if run as
On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 09:05:19AM +0200, Nicolas Joly wrote:
> Adding the following to the testcase header should do the trick:
>
>atf_tc_set_md_var(tc,"require.user","unprivileged");
>
> In that case, if run as root, it will lower its privileges to the
> unprivileged user _atf before ru
On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 08:32:14AM +0300, Jukka Ruohonen wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 01:59:50AM +, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> > >Check for getuid(2) == 0.
> >
> > Why not setuid() to fix it?
>
> That would indeed be the right thing to do. However, I am not quite sure how
> atf(7) actually
