Re: xclock patch

> This patch forces xclock to read XErrorDB before pledge(). Further > calls to any of the X error handler will used the in-memory copy (see > libX11/src/ErrDes.c:147). So basically, it primes the in-memory cache. Then the syscall codepaths are avoided later on. > I'm not yet 100% sure if

Re: xclock patch

On Sat, May 07, 2016 at 02:01:34PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote: > > > So I don't understand why pledge is being added here. > > > > Because you suggested it back in november... > > Of course I suggested it: I believe I said it would be nice if > the simplest of X programs were investigated. > >

Re: xclock patch

> > So I don't understand why pledge is being added here. > > Because you suggested it back in november... Of course I suggested it: I believe I said it would be nice if the simplest of X programs were investigated. But everywhere else pledge was inserted, that requires (a) full understanding

Re: xclock patch

On Sat, May 07, 2016 at 07:15:00AM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote: > > On Sat, May 07, 2016 at 06:48:58AM -0500, Edgar Pettijohn wrote: > > > > > > > > else, if it isn't in xclock code, it could be a open(2) call in some > > > > X11R6 library. > > > > > > > I looked all I found was access() which if

Re: xclock patch

Sent from my iPhone > On May 7, 2016, at 8:03 AM, Sebastien Marie wrote: > > On Sat, May 07, 2016 at 06:48:58AM -0500, Edgar Pettijohn wrote: >>> >>> else, if it isn't in xclock code, it could be a open(2) call in some >>> X11R6 library. >> I looked all I found was

Re: xclock patch

> On Sat, May 07, 2016 at 06:48:58AM -0500, Edgar Pettijohn wrote: > > > > > > else, if it isn't in xclock code, it could be a open(2) call in some > > > X11R6 library. > > > > > I looked all I found was access() which if I'm reading pledge correctly it > > doesn't need pledge. Is that right? >

Re: xclock patch

On Sat, May 07, 2016 at 06:48:58AM -0500, Edgar Pettijohn wrote: > > > > else, if it isn't in xclock code, it could be a open(2) call in some > > X11R6 library. > > > I looked all I found was access() which if I'm reading pledge correctly it > doesn't need pledge. Is that right? > now, I am

Re: xclock patch

On Sat, May 07, 2016 at 06:48:58AM -0500, Edgar Pettijohn wrote: > > > > else, if it isn't in xclock code, it could be a open(2) call in some > > X11R6 library. > > > I looked all I found was access() which if I'm reading pledge correctly it > doesn't need pledge. Is that right? > What I mean

Re: xclock patch

Sent from my iPhone > On May 6, 2016, at 11:49 PM, Sebastien Marie wrote: > > On Fri, May 06, 2016 at 01:29:11PM -0500, Edgar Pettijohn wrote: >>> On May 6, 2016, at 12:13 PM, Matthieu Herrb wrote: >>> On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 11:40:31AM -0500,

Re: xclock patch

Sent from my iPhone > On May 6, 2016, at 12:13 PM, Matthieu Herrb wrote: > >> On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 11:40:31AM -0500, Edgar Pettijohn wrote: >> I'll look at it this evening. > > Ping... > Sorry. I tried to get it to reproduce and couldn't. Looked through the code and

Re: xclock patch

On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 11:40:31AM -0500, Edgar Pettijohn wrote: > I'll look at it this evening. > Ping... > Sent from my iPhone > > > On May 3, 2016, at 9:40 AM, Sebastien Marie wrote: > > > >> On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 05:39:36PM -0500, Edgar Pettijohn wrote: > >> I saw

Re: xclock patch

On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 05:39:36PM -0500, Edgar Pettijohn wrote: > I saw this in /var/log/messages > > May 2 17:19:07 thinkpad /bsd: xclock(81091): syscall 5 "rpath" > > Does it mean xclock needs rpath? If so here you go. generally it is what it means: at some point, the program required

xclock patch

I saw this in /var/log/messages May 2 17:19:07 thinkpad /bsd: xclock(81091): syscall 5 "rpath" Does it mean xclock needs rpath? If so here you go. Index: xclock.c === RCS file: /cvs/xenocara/app/xclock/xclock.c,v retrieving