>Let's try to simplify it. Try some (or all) of these: Wilco.
>* Run inetd with the same config on your own x?86 desktop. That would be hard. Not impossible, but hard. (Not using busybox at all there, is my development system and don't want to screw it up.) Might do that a bit later. >* Does it happen if you start inetd, *don't* SIGHUP it, > and repeatedly run ./bury against it? > (is SIGHUPing a factor in reproducing it?) Yes, it still leaks even with no HUP action. Slowly. >* Does it happen if you replace > telnet stream tcp nowait.12 root /usr/sbin/telnetd telnetd -i > with telnet stream tcp nowait.12 root /bin/true true > (iow, if server prog just exits at once)? Yes, still leaks. Also leaks with false instead of true. Slowly. It also leaks in the /bin/false case even when the .12 is removed from the nowait. Big evil happened in the /bin/false case when the nowait was changed to a wait. ps shows no children, but the fd list was full up to 1023, and stayed that way. When changed to wait.12 there remained 11 sockets, where there should be 1. No child processes shown. That's bad, and ought to be easily chasable. -- Jim _______________________________________________ busybox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
