netinet memcpy/free

2018-03-31 Thread David Hill
Hello - memcpy can be used on freshly allocated memory. Fill in the free size for it. OK? Index: netinet/tcp_subr.c === RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/netinet/tcp_subr.c,v retrieving revision 1.169 diff -u -p -r1.169 tcp_subr.c ---

Re: binutils: build with LLVM 6.0.0

2018-03-31 Thread Patrick Wildt
On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 09:31:13PM -0600, Todd C. Miller wrote: > On Thu, 15 Mar 2018 17:23:24 +0100, Patrick Wildt wrote: > > > diff --git a/gnu/usr.bin/binutils-2.17/include/obstack.h > > b/gnu/usr.bin/binuti > > ls-2.17/include/obstack.h > > index 88c2a264adc..8839c48e95f 100644 > > ---

Re: dd(1): snprintf+writev -> dprintf

2018-03-31 Thread Scott Cheloha
On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 01:04:43PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote: > The only worry about converting from iov to dprintf could be some > atomicity requirement. I don't really see that in play here, I think > the iov uses was simply for convenience. No other 'signalling interrupts' > seem to be in

arch/amd64 free

2018-03-31 Thread David Hill
Hello - This diff is more involved. In est_acpi_pss_changed, a new table is allocated but n isn't updated, which keep tracks of the number allocated. Set it. In est_init, fake_table was being allocated with 3. Change that to allocate exactly what is need by setting n earlier. Regarding the

Re: dd(1): snprintf+writev -> dprintf

2018-03-31 Thread Theo de Raadt
> On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 01:04:43PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote: > > The only worry about converting from iov to dprintf could be some > > atomicity requirement. I don't really see that in play here, I think > > the iov uses was simply for convenience. No other 'signalling interrupts' > > seem

Re: binutils: build with LLVM 6.0.0

2018-03-31 Thread Patrick Wildt
On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 03:55:25PM -0700, William Ahern wrote: > On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 05:23:24PM +0100, Patrick Wildt wrote: > > Hi, > > > > LLVM 6.0.0 does now complain of code does computation on NULL pointers, > > which apparently binutils makes use of. I think we can teach binutils > > to

Re: manpage text width

2018-03-31 Thread Walter Alejandro Iglesias
Hi Ingo, In article <20180329235743.ge59...@athene.usta.de> Ingo Schwarze wrote: > > Can I do anything to fix this? > > Yes. > I've always wondered why groff did that nonsense with man pages. I remember discussing this same issue in groff mailing lists years ago (with E.

Re: dd(1): snprintf+writev -> dprintf

2018-03-31 Thread Theo de Raadt
The only worry about converting from iov to dprintf could be some atomicity requirement. I don't really see that in play here, I think the iov uses was simply for convenience. No other 'signalling interrupts' seem to be in play.

Re: binutils: build with LLVM 6.0.0

2018-03-31 Thread Mark Kettenis
> Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2018 21:58:06 +0200 > From: Patrick Wildt > > On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 03:55:25PM -0700, William Ahern wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 05:23:24PM +0100, Patrick Wildt wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > LLVM 6.0.0 does now complain of code does computation on

mfs free

2018-03-31 Thread David Hill
Add the free size. (allocated in mfs_vfsops.c) mfsp = malloc(sizeof *mfsp, M_MFSNODE, M_WAITOK | M_ZERO); devvp->v_data = mfsp; OK? Index: ufs/mfs/mfs_vnops.c === RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/ufs/mfs/mfs_vnops.c,v

Re: ufs free()

2018-03-31 Thread Christian Weisgerber
David Hill: > This diff adds sizes to free(), which completes ufs/ffs. It's broken at least for softdep+UFS2. This chunk blows up: > --- ufs/ffs/ffs_softdep.c 10 Feb 2018 05:24:23 - 1.138 > +++ ufs/ffs/ffs_softdep.c 29 Mar 2018 02:55:37 - > @@ -4034,7 +4036,8 @@

Re: ufs free()

2018-03-31 Thread David Hill
On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 11:15:35PM +0200, Christian Weisgerber wrote: > David Hill: > > > This diff adds sizes to free(), which completes ufs/ffs. > > It's broken at least for softdep+UFS2. This chunk blows up: > > > --- ufs/ffs/ffs_softdep.c 10 Feb 2018 05:24:23 - 1.138 > > +++

Re: manpage text width

2018-03-31 Thread Andras Farkas
On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 11:23 AM, Chris Bennett wrote: > This is very important. Our brains just are not good at working with > long lines. This is hard-wired. If anyone doesn't believe me, try > setting your browser window to a narrower width or use reader mode.

Re: manpage text width

2018-03-31 Thread Marc Espie
On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 01:57:43AM +0200, Ingo Schwarze wrote: > I do *NOT* want to add SIGWINCH signal handling to man(1) to abort > less(1), reformat, and respawn less(1) in that case. That kind of > magic would be over the top, and SIGWINCH is an abomination in the > first place. Why on earth

Re: Should rm(1) -Pf change file permission?

2018-03-31 Thread Craig Skinner
Hi Grégoire/all, On Fri, 30 Mar 2018 18:07:42 +0200 Grégoire Jadi wrote: > ... here is a small test to demonstrate ... Same behaviour noticed and previously bugged:- http://openbsd-archive.7691.n7.nabble.com/rm-P-doesn-t-overwrite-a-user-owned-read-only-file-td266276.html Regards, -- Craig

Re: expr: Fix integer overflows

2018-03-31 Thread Tobias Stoeckmann
Hi, On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 02:57:45AM +0200, Ingo Schwarze wrote: > Even though - as discussed previously for test(1) - behaviour is > undefined by POSIX outside the range 0 to 2147483647, we are allowed > to handle a larger range, and i agree that handling the range > -9223372036854775808 to

libsa: udp read changes endianness

2018-03-31 Thread Patrick Wildt
Hi, I have been working on TFTP boot support for arm64 and armv7 on top of u-boot. One thing that set me back was an endianness issue. TFTP works the way that you send to port 69, but when the server answers he chooses a new source port. So when you reply again, you have to reply to the new

Re: manpage text width

2018-03-31 Thread Martin Pieuchot
On 31/03/18(Sat) 03:20, Ingo Schwarze wrote: > Paul Irofti wrote on Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 11:23:54AM +0300: > [...] > > which is EXACTLY what I was looking for! Can it be the default? :) > > I'm neither particularly enthusiastiastic (because it requires > more code, in particular more getenv(3)

Re: manpage text width

2018-03-31 Thread Lars Noodén
On 3/31/18, Andras Farkas wrote: > On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 11:23 AM, Chris Bennett wrote: >> This is very important. Our brains just are not good at working with >> long lines. This is hard-wired. If anyone doesn't believe me, try >> setting your browser window to a narrower width or use reader

Re: expr: Fix integer overflows

2018-03-31 Thread Ingo Schwarze
Hi Tobias, Tobias Stoeckmann wrote on Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 01:28:19PM +0200: > I actually ended up in expr(1) after seeing that the test(1) and ksh(1) > debate could be continued here. While expr(1) is int64_t, expressions > in ksh(1) are of type long, i.e. 32/64 bit depending on architecture. >

Re: manpage text width

2018-03-31 Thread Theo de Raadt
> Don't you already need this logic, getenv(3) + isatty(3), to decide if > you use a pager or not? Although I don't understand why getenv(3) is > needed, isn't a TIOCGWINSZ ioctl(2) enough?. Because there is a defacto standard that some SVR2 environment (before the ioctl) be honoured by many

Re: libsa: udp read changes endianness

2018-03-31 Thread Theo de Raadt
> I think we should not convert headers into a host-readable format, the > upper layers need to know the network layers if they do this kind of > layer overreach. I agree. It probably comes from a time when ntohs and family were true functions (during the inline asm conversion days); it was seen

[PATCH] Update default QoS markers for ssh

2018-03-31 Thread Job Snijders
Dear all, There may be opportunity for improvement of ssh(1) and sshd(8)'s default QoS markers for better integration in environments that can offer either layer-2 or layer-3 prioritisation profiles. Currently ssh(1) and sshd(8) set obsoleted values 'lowdelay' for interactive sessions and

Re: Should rm(1) -Pf change file permission?

2018-03-31 Thread Ingo Schwarze
Hi, Gregoire Jadi wrote on Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 06:07:42PM +0200: > While working on a port of keyringer, I observed the following behavior > of rm(1) with the -P option: if the file does not have write permission, > the file is removed without being overwritten. > > This is not the same

Re: dd(1): overhaul operand parsing

2018-03-31 Thread Scott Cheloha
Updated diff with changes from tobias@: This patch now removes (u_int) casts from input/output buffer allocation in dd.c, which was incorrect beforehand anyway, but with the other changes here was manifesting as a segfault for combinations of cbs and ibs/obs that overflowed u_int. -- Scott

dd(1): snprintf+writev -> dprintf

2018-03-31 Thread Scott Cheloha
Simpler. ok? -- Scott Cheloha Index: bin/dd/misc.c === RCS file: /cvs/src/bin/dd/misc.c,v retrieving revision 1.22 diff -u -p -r1.22 misc.c --- bin/dd/misc.c 24 Oct 2017 14:21:10 - 1.22 +++ bin/dd/misc.c 31 Mar