Am 06.10.13 21:59, schrieb Marc Balmer:
I am in the progress of
- Updating the Lua code in base from version 5.1 to version 5.2
- Commiting the kernel parts from our GSoC project, Lua in the NetBSD
Kernel
mrg@ suggestest that I move the Lua source code from src/external/ to
On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 12:05:26PM +0200, Alan Barrett wrote:
If the same source code will be compiled into both the kernel and
userland, then I think that src/common/external/licence/name
would be the place for that.
Let's please not import new sources from 3rd parties into src/common.
On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Thomas Klausner w...@netbsd.org wrote:
On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 08:37:23AM +0200, Marc Balmer wrote:
So if no one really objects the plan is as follows:
- Import Lua 5.2 to src/sys/external/
- Remove Lua 5.1 from src/external/
apb suggested using
Am 09.10.13 10:26, schrieb Thomas Klausner:
On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 08:37:23AM +0200, Marc Balmer wrote:
So if no one really objects the plan is as follows:
- Import Lua 5.2 to src/sys/external/
- Remove Lua 5.1 from src/external/
apb suggested using src/common/external/licence/name and
Am 09.10.13 10:53, schrieb Justin Cormack:
On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Thomas Klausner w...@netbsd.org wrote:
On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 08:37:23AM +0200, Marc Balmer wrote:
So if no one really objects the plan is as follows:
- Import Lua 5.2 to src/sys/external/
- Remove Lua 5.1 from
I need a certain user to be a member of (or, more precisely, have NFS access
to the data of) more than 16 groups.
One way to go would be to use umapfs to map 16 groups to one.
Is it possible to compile a kernel with a raised NGROUPS or NGROUPS_MAX?
Is there any downside (apart from slightly
I need a certain user to be a member of (or, more precisely, have NFS
access to the data of) more than 16 groups.
Is it possible to compile a kernel with a raised NGROUPS or
NGROUPS_MAX?
Of course. But will it do what you want?
At the very least I expect you'll have to do this on both the
Matt Thomas m...@3am-software.com writes:
A lot of systems are coming with compute/peripheral processors with
limited ram, etc.
I was wondering what the abstraction should be?
Obviously, mmap()'ing their memory would be nice. But what about
stopping/starting? Messaging?
How about
Of course. But will it do what you want?
I don't understand your concerns.
My intention was to let the NFS client run the modified kernel with a raised
group limit. Then, the process in question will be a member of more than 16
secondary groups which will enable it to access files readable
Enforcing access limits is the client's business, isn't it?
Ouch. Authenticatin is the client's business, but access limits aren't.
Sorry for the noise.
[...] compute/peripheral processors [...] abstraction [...]
How about using/extending the ptrace API to handle this? It looks
like the primitives required are the same (+mmap you mention).
And it would make sense to be able to attach to a
qemu/coprocessor-provided process. [...]
An idea
On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 03:18:23PM +0200, Edgar Fu? wrote:
I need a certain user to be a member of (or, more precisely, have NFS access
to the data of) more than 16 groups.
One way to go would be to use umapfs to map 16 groups to one.
Is it possible to compile a kernel with a raised NGROUPS
The higher versions of the protocol prefer sites to avoid AUTH_SYS.
For discussion, see here
http://nfsworld.blogspot.com/2005/03/whats-deal-on-16-group-id-limitation.html
Independent of the auth type, an NFS server could use ordinary methods to
associate groups whatever user is selected for a
Justin Cormack jus...@specialbusservice.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Thomas Klausner w...@netbsd.org wrote:
On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 08:37:23AM +0200, Marc Balmer wrote:
So if no one really objects the plan is as follows:
- Import Lua 5.2 to src/sys/external/
- Remove Lua
e...@math.uni-bonn.de (Edgar =?iso-8859-1?B?RnXf?=) writes:
Of course. But will it do what you want?
I don't understand your concerns.
My intention was to let the NFS client run the modified kernel with a raised
group limit. Then, the process in question will be a member of more than 16
On Sun, Oct 06, 2013 at 10:51:36PM +0200, Nicolas Joly wrote:
It needs the PAD, syscalls files generation fails without it
(sysalign=1).
/bin/sh makesyscalls.sh syscalls.conf syscalls.master
syscalls.master: line 905: unexpected dev (expected a padding argument)
line is:
460 STD
On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 02:11:09PM +, Brian Ginsbach wrote:
Recent versions of AIX, Solaris, and Linux contain work-arounds that
essentially by-pass the 16 group limitation (RFC 5531). The
degree of by-pass varies (the number of additional groups may not
necessarily be unlimited).
this
17 matches
Mail list logo
