Re: [PATCHv2] Use sendfile to copy data between file descriptors
Well, this is fortuitous. From the kernel mailing list: From: Pieter Smith pie...@boesman.nl Subject: [PATCH 2/2] fs: Support compiling out sendfile Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2014 23:48:37 +0200 Many embedded systems will not need this syscall, and omitting it saves space. Add a new EXPERT config option CONFIG_SENDFILE_SYSCALL (default y) to support compiling it out. There's a pleasing symmetry that while BusyBox gains the ability to configure in sendfile the kernel gains the ability to configure it out. Ron ___ busybox mailing list busybox@busybox.net http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
Re: [PATCHv2] Use sendfile to copy data between file descriptors
On Tue, Oct 21, 2014, at 08:46, Mike Frysinger wrote: On 20 Oct 2014 21:00, Lauri Kasanen wrote: +config FEATURE_USE_SENDFILE +bool Use sendfile system call +default y +help + When enabled, busybox will use the kernel sendfile() function + instead of read/write loops where applicable. Please include the kernel version requirement here. `man 2 sendfile`: In Linux kernels before 2.6.33, out_fd must refer to a socket. Since Linux 2.6.33 it can be any file. If it is a regular file, then sendfile() changes the file offset appropriately. -mike Yes, I know? The point was to tell the user configuring busybox that. - Lauri PS: Sorry, forgot the list the first time. -- http://www.fastmail.fm - Or how I learned to stop worrying and love email again ___ busybox mailing list busybox@busybox.net http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
Re: [PATCHv2] Use sendfile to copy data between file descriptors
On 21 Oct 2014 11:01, Lauri Kasanen wrote: On Tue, Oct 21, 2014, at 08:46, Mike Frysinger wrote: On 20 Oct 2014 21:00, Lauri Kasanen wrote: +config FEATURE_USE_SENDFILE +bool Use sendfile system call +default y +help + When enabled, busybox will use the kernel sendfile() function + instead of read/write loops where applicable. Please include the kernel version requirement here. `man 2 sendfile`: In Linux kernels before 2.6.33, out_fd must refer to a socket. Since Linux 2.6.33 it can be any file. If it is a regular file, then sendfile() changes the file offset appropriately. Yes, I know? The point was to tell the user configuring busybox that. chill dog. the fact you knew it doesn't mean the submitter did. nowhere did i say you were ignorant. -mike signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ busybox mailing list busybox@busybox.net http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
Re: Need known defect list for BusyBox
On 13 Oct 2014 10:13, Priyadarshini, Chethana (GE Healthcare) wrote: We are performing a SOUP(Software of Unknown Pedigree) anomaly for the purpose of audit. With regard to this we need to check if the 3rd party software which we are using in our product has any known defects and its impact on our product. Hence can you please send me the known defect list such that we can analyze it and see if it has any impact on our medical device. sorry, but busybox maintains no such information. you'd have to read the full commit history yourself to see what's what. http://git.busybox.net/busybox/log/ there almost certainly are bugs in that version, but whether it impacts your product, you'd have to decide. -mike signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ busybox mailing list busybox@busybox.net http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
Re: 1.22.1: been hit by the zcat bug
On 20 Oct 2014 20:54, Cristian Ionescu-Idbohrn wrote: That deserves a patch in http://busybox.net/downloads/fixes-1.22.1/, IMO. At least, commits: 7c47b560a8fc97956dd8132bd7f1863d83c19866 b664f740d90880560ce46b11f766625341342e80 640ce3de07807133796bccd0bdfa146bbfc788c7 may be relevantat. what exactly are you calling the zcat bug ? seems to me only the first one should be backported. `busybox zcat foo` failing when foo is not compressed matches standard `zcat` behavior. -mike signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ busybox mailing list busybox@busybox.net http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
Re: 1.22.1: been hit by the zcat bug
On Tue, 21 Oct 2014, Mike Frysinger wrote: On 20 Oct 2014 20:54, Cristian Ionescu-Idbohrn wrote: That deserves a patch in http://busybox.net/downloads/fixes-1.22.1/, IMO. At least, commits: 7c47b560a8fc97956dd8132bd7f1863d83c19866 b664f740d90880560ce46b11f766625341342e80 640ce3de07807133796bccd0bdfa146bbfc788c7 may be relevantat. what exactly are you calling the zcat bug ? seems to me only the first one should be backported. `busybox zcat foo` failing when foo is not compressed matches standard `zcat` behavior. -mike Well, but it fails (but returns exit status success) even if the file is compressed (ex. gzipped) but the fipped file extension isn't .gz. It will procuce an exact copy of the original. This is a .tar.gz file: -rw-r--r--1 root root 2736 Oct 21 16:32 foo.tar.bar # zcat foo.tar.bar foo.tar;echo $? 0 -rw-r--r--1 root root 2736 Oct 21 16:37 foo.tar -rw-r--r--1 root root 2736 Oct 21 16:32 foo.tar.bar Attemting to extract the archive will fail instead, with appropriate exit status. Cheers, -- Cristian ___ busybox mailing list busybox@busybox.net http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
Re: 1.22.1: been hit by the zcat bug
On Tue, 21 Oct 2014, Cristian Ionescu-Idbohrn wrote: On Tue, 21 Oct 2014, Mike Frysinger wrote: On 20 Oct 2014 20:54, Cristian Ionescu-Idbohrn wrote: That deserves a patch in http://busybox.net/downloads/fixes-1.22.1/, IMO. At least, commits: 7c47b560a8fc97956dd8132bd7f1863d83c19866 b664f740d90880560ce46b11f766625341342e80 640ce3de07807133796bccd0bdfa146bbfc788c7 may be relevantat. what exactly are you calling the zcat bug ? seems to me only the first one should be backported. `busybox zcat foo` failing when foo is not compressed matches standard `zcat` behavior. -mike Well, but it fails (but returns exit status success) even if the file is compressed (ex. gzipped) but the fipped file extension isn't .gz. It will procuce an exact copy of the original. This is a .tar.gz file: -rw-r--r--1 root root 2736 Oct 21 16:32 foo.tar.bar # zcat foo.tar.bar foo.tar;echo $? 0 -rw-r--r--1 root root 2736 Oct 21 16:37 foo.tar -rw-r--r--1 root root 2736 Oct 21 16:32 foo.tar.bar Attemting to extract the archive will fail instead, with appropriate exit status. If I do: # ln -s foo.tar.bar foo.tar.gz # zcat foo.tar.gz foo.tar;echo $? 0 -rw-r--r--1 root root 40960 Oct 21 17:37 foo.tar -rw-r--r--1 root root 2736 Oct 21 17:36 foo.tar.bar lrwxrwxrwx1 root root11 Oct 21 17:37 foo.tar.gz - foo.tar.bar I get what I expect. Cheers, -- Cristian ___ busybox mailing list busybox@busybox.net http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
Re: 1.22.1: been hit by the zcat bug
On 21 Oct 2014 18:41, Cristian Ionescu-Idbohrn wrote: On Tue, 21 Oct 2014, Mike Frysinger wrote: On 20 Oct 2014 20:54, Cristian Ionescu-Idbohrn wrote: That deserves a patch in http://busybox.net/downloads/fixes-1.22.1/, IMO. At least, commits: 7c47b560a8fc97956dd8132bd7f1863d83c19866 b664f740d90880560ce46b11f766625341342e80 640ce3de07807133796bccd0bdfa146bbfc788c7 may be relevantat. what exactly are you calling the zcat bug ? seems to me only the first one should be backported. `busybox zcat foo` failing when foo is not compressed matches standard `zcat` behavior. -mike Well, but it fails (but returns exit status success) even if the file is compressed (ex. gzipped) but the fipped file extension isn't .gz. It will procuce an exact copy of the original. yes, but that bug is only fixed by the first commit in your list: 7c47b560a8fc97956dd8132bd7f1863d83c19866 the others have no impact on that, hence my question as to what exactly are you looking to get fixed ? -mike signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ busybox mailing list busybox@busybox.net http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
Re: 1.22.1: been hit by the zcat bug
On Tue, 21 Oct 2014, Mike Frysinger wrote: On 21 Oct 2014 18:41, Cristian Ionescu-Idbohrn wrote: On Tue, 21 Oct 2014, Mike Frysinger wrote: On 20 Oct 2014 20:54, Cristian Ionescu-Idbohrn wrote: That deserves a patch in http://busybox.net/downloads/fixes-1.22.1/, IMO. At least, commits: 7c47b560a8fc97956dd8132bd7f1863d83c19866 b664f740d90880560ce46b11f766625341342e80 640ce3de07807133796bccd0bdfa146bbfc788c7 may be relevantat. what exactly are you calling the zcat bug ? seems to me only the first one should be backported. `busybox zcat foo` failing when foo is not compressed matches standard `zcat` behavior. -mike Well, but it fails (but returns exit status success) even if the file is compressed (ex. gzipped) but the fipped file extension isn't .gz. It will procuce an exact copy of the original. yes, but that bug is only fixed by the first commit in your list: 7c47b560a8fc97956dd8132bd7f1863d83c19866 Ok, if you say so. But if I look at: $ git log --unified --reverse 1_22_1..master -- archival I get the impression commit 7c47b560a8fc97956dd8132bd7f1863d83c19866, by itself, isn't enough. At least b664f740d90880560ce46b11f766625341342e80 [libbb: open_zipped() should not fail on non-compressed files] and 640ce3de07807133796bccd0bdfa146bbfc788c7 [zcat: complain if input is not compressed] are also related. the others have no impact on that, hence my question as to what exactly are you looking to get fixed ? Nothing needs to be fixed. What I'm merryly suggesting is adding the appropriate _existing_ patch(es) to http://busybox.net/downloads/fixes-1.22.1/. There may be a general intrest in that. Cheers, -- Cristian ___ busybox mailing list busybox@busybox.net http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
Re: 1.22.1: been hit by the zcat bug
On 21 Oct 2014 20:02, Cristian Ionescu-Idbohrn wrote: On Tue, 21 Oct 2014, Mike Frysinger wrote: On 21 Oct 2014 18:41, Cristian Ionescu-Idbohrn wrote: On Tue, 21 Oct 2014, Mike Frysinger wrote: On 20 Oct 2014 20:54, Cristian Ionescu-Idbohrn wrote: That deserves a patch in http://busybox.net/downloads/fixes-1.22.1/, IMO. At least, commits: 7c47b560a8fc97956dd8132bd7f1863d83c19866 b664f740d90880560ce46b11f766625341342e80 640ce3de07807133796bccd0bdfa146bbfc788c7 may be relevantat. what exactly are you calling the zcat bug ? seems to me only the first one should be backported. `busybox zcat foo` failing when foo is not compressed matches standard `zcat` behavior. -mike Well, but it fails (but returns exit status success) even if the file is compressed (ex. gzipped) but the fipped file extension isn't .gz. It will procuce an exact copy of the original. yes, but that bug is only fixed by the first commit in your list: 7c47b560a8fc97956dd8132bd7f1863d83c19866 Ok, if you say so. But if I look at: if you take 1.22.1, this fails: $ echo hi | gzip f $ busybox zcat f binary data if you cherry pick that one commit, zcat now operates as you expect: $ busybox zcat f hi reading the logs/code of those other commits does not look to me like they're relevant to this issue. the others have no impact on that, hence my question as to what exactly are you looking to get fixed ? Nothing needs to be fixed. What I'm merryly suggesting is adding the appropriate _existing_ patch(es) to http://busybox.net/downloads/fixes-1.22.1/. There may be a general intrest in that. yes, but the branches aren't just let's cherry pick everything. they tend to be for specific bugs that users have noticed. hence i'm asking, what bugs are you seeing in the current release that you want fixed *in the branch* ? so far, you've shown one case, and only (small) commit is needed for that. if you have no other use cases that are impacted, we'll just ignore the rest and move on. -mike signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ busybox mailing list busybox@busybox.net http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
Re: 1.22.1: been hit by the zcat bug
On Tue, 21 Oct 2014, Mike Frysinger wrote: On 21 Oct 2014 20:02, Cristian Ionescu-Idbohrn wrote: Nothing needs to be fixed. What I'm merryly suggesting is adding the appropriate _existing_ patch(es) to http://busybox.net/downloads/fixes-1.22.1/. There may be a general intrest in that. yes, but the branches aren't just let's cherry pick everything. I didn't suggest that. I recall saying appropriate. they tend to be for specific bugs that users have noticed. hence i'm asking, what bugs are you seeing in the current release that you want fixed *in the branch* ? so far, you've shown one case, and only (small) commit is needed for that. if you have no other use cases that are impacted, we'll just ignore the rest and move on. Whatever. You decide. I can do my own patching. Cheers, -- Cristian ___ busybox mailing list busybox@busybox.net http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
Re: 1.22.1: been hit by the zcat bug
On 21 Oct 2014 20:26, Cristian Ionescu-Idbohrn wrote: On Tue, 21 Oct 2014, Mike Frysinger wrote: On 21 Oct 2014 20:02, Cristian Ionescu-Idbohrn wrote: Nothing needs to be fixed. What I'm merryly suggesting is adding the appropriate _existing_ patch(es) to http://busybox.net/downloads/fixes-1.22.1/. There may be a general intrest in that. yes, but the branches aren't just let's cherry pick everything. I didn't suggest that. I recall saying appropriate. they tend to be for specific bugs that users have noticed. hence i'm asking, what bugs are you seeing in the current release that you want fixed *in the branch* ? so far, you've shown one case, and only (small) commit is needed for that. if you have no other use cases that are impacted, we'll just ignore the rest and move on. Whatever. You decide. I can do my own patching. ffs, i don't know why all this pointless dancing. i guess the answer is you only have the one use case, so only that one patch needs to be cherry picked. you aren't hitting any other issues, so there's no need to waste time backporting other commits. -mike signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ busybox mailing list busybox@busybox.net http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
small documentation update for telnetd
Hi, the attached trivial patch corrects the list of linux kernel options that are required for busybox telnetd. DEVPTS_FS has been obsolete for some time. Best regards, Martin From ef997073934b2e5053d324168e8eb546b9269a6c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Martin Kaiser mar...@kaiser.cx Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2014 21:23:28 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] telnetd: we only need CONFIG_UNIX98_PTYS from the Linux kernel Signed-off-by: Martin Kaiser mar...@kaiser.cx --- networking/Config.src |3 +-- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/networking/Config.src b/networking/Config.src index e566469..d15e432 100644 --- a/networking/Config.src +++ b/networking/Config.src @@ -758,8 +758,7 @@ config TELNETD Note that for busybox telnetd to work you need several things: First of all, your kernel needs: - UNIX98_PTYS=y - DEVPTS_FS=y + CONFIG_UNIX98_PTYS=y Next, you need a /dev/pts directory on your root filesystem: -- 1.7.10.4 ___ busybox mailing list busybox@busybox.net http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
Re: 1.22.1: been hit by the zcat bug
On Tue, 21 Oct 2014, Mike Frysinger wrote: On 21 Oct 2014 20:26, Cristian Ionescu-Idbohrn wrote: On Tue, 21 Oct 2014, Mike Frysinger wrote: On 21 Oct 2014 20:02, Cristian Ionescu-Idbohrn wrote: Nothing needs to be fixed. What I'm merryly suggesting is adding the appropriate _existing_ patch(es) to http://busybox.net/downloads/fixes-1.22.1/. There may be a general intrest in that. yes, but the branches aren't just let's cherry pick everything. I didn't suggest that. I recall saying appropriate. they tend to be for specific bugs that users have noticed. hence i'm asking, what bugs are you seeing in the current release that you want fixed *in the branch* ? so far, you've shown one case, and only (small) commit is needed for that. if you have no other use cases that are impacted, we'll just ignore the rest and move on. Whatever. You decide. I can do my own patching. ffs, i don't know why all this pointless dancing. i guess the answer is you only have the one use case, so only that one patch needs to be cherry picked. you aren't hitting any other issues, so there's no need to waste time backporting other commits. -mike Please go ahead with whatever you think fit. Cheers, -- Cristian ___ busybox mailing list busybox@busybox.net http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
