That's my sql with the error code from firebird.
SELECT simple('tes t !') FROM rdb$database
ISC ERROR CODE:335544343
ISC ERROR MESSAGE:
invalid request BLR at offset 79
function SIMPLE is not defined
module name or entrypoint could not be found
UDF declation is
DECLARE EXTERNAL FUNCTION SIMPL
A host application compiled with fpc don't have this problem.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Vincent
Snijders
Sent: mercredi 18 juillet 2007 18:41
To: FPC developers' list
Subject: Re: [fpc-devel] DLL WIN64: Entry point not found
Luc Viga
Therefore, console is popular as well.
I second this! So far I've using FPC to develop server-side application (using
PSP/PWU) which has no X installed on the server machine and I only have SSH
access to the machine. fpIDE is the best text mode IDE on Linux.
-Bee-
has Bee.ography at:
http:/
> On Wed, 18 Jul 2007, Dani?l Mantione wrote:
> > What is bad about such a solution?
>
> It's not KIS. If you can't have certain keys without being root, well then
> you'll have to learn to live with it.
IMHO either give up the textmode IDE, or try to support it to the fullest
extend.
> This is
> Op Wed, 18 Jul 2007, schreef Michael Van Canneyt:
> > Under the assumption a setuid root program is the only possible option:
> >
> > The safest - and in my opinion only correct - way is to write a small
> > setuid
> > root program which sets the proper TTY stuff, and then executes the IDE as
> Ales wrote:
> A project the size of the IDE is unauditable, given it's size.
> This again is not meant to criticize the IDE - any project of the size
> is unauditable.
Not that it is doable for us for the IDE, but OpenBSD seems to think
otherwise.
But I still think not making a separation betwe
Op Wed, 18 Jul 2007, schreef Michael Van Canneyt:
> > The "scary" thing is the setuid root. The communication channel can be
> > standard i/o and there is nothing scary about that.
>
> There is: a user using the keyboard unit should then distribute the
> (setuid) program too, and that is not a
On 18 Jul 2007, at 22:17, Micha Nelissen wrote:
Jonas Maebe wrote:
Since there are only 3 parameters, it should be possible to do
this even
on i386.
Implemented and committed; but thinking about it, does it really
matter
? It's still being executed more or less asynchronous to the
appli
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007, Daniël Mantione wrote:
>
>
> Op Wed, 18 Jul 2007, schreef Michael Van Canneyt:
>
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 18 Jul 2007, Daniël Mantione wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Op Wed, 18 Jul 2007, schreef Michael Van Canneyt:
> > >
> > > > > > well then that's it... If you want to u
Jonas Maebe wrote:
> Since there are only 3 parameters, it should be possible to do this even
> on i386.
Implemented and committed; but thinking about it, does it really matter
? It's still being executed more or less asynchronous to the
application: it could be in the middle of heap manager opera
Op Wed, 18 Jul 2007, schreef Michael Van Canneyt:
>
>
> On Wed, 18 Jul 2007, Daniël Mantione wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Op Wed, 18 Jul 2007, schreef Michael Van Canneyt:
> >
> > > > > well then that's it... If you want to use these keys, you'll have to
> > > > > run your
> > > > > programs as r
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007, Daniël Mantione wrote:
>
>
> Op Wed, 18 Jul 2007, schreef Michael Van Canneyt:
>
> > > > well then that's it... If you want to use these keys, you'll have to
> > > > run your
> > > > programs as root...
> > > >
> > > > Or use a GUI IDE like Lazarus...
> > >
> > > You j
Op Wed, 18 Jul 2007, schreef Michael Van Canneyt:
> > > well then that's it... If you want to use these keys, you'll have to run
> > > your
> > > programs as root...
> > >
> > > Or use a GUI IDE like Lazarus...
> >
> > You just proposed this yourself, but before executing the IDE?
>
> ? I pr
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007, Daniël Mantione wrote:
>
>
> Op Wed, 18 Jul 2007, schreef Michael Van Canneyt:
>
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 18 Jul 2007, Daniël Mantione wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Op Wed, 18 Jul 2007, schreef Michael Van Canneyt:
> > >
> > > > On Wed, 18 Jul 2007, Ales( Katona wrote:
>
Op Wed, 18 Jul 2007, schreef Michael Van Canneyt:
>
>
> On Wed, 18 Jul 2007, Daniël Mantione wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Op Wed, 18 Jul 2007, schreef Michael Van Canneyt:
> >
> > > On Wed, 18 Jul 2007, Ales( Katona wrote:
> > >
> > > > Why? You have your good ol' PING doing it. I agree tho that
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007, Daniël Mantione wrote:
>
>
> Op Wed, 18 Jul 2007, schreef Michael Van Canneyt:
>
> > On Wed, 18 Jul 2007, Ales( Katona wrote:
> >
> > > Why? You have your good ol' PING doing it. I agree tho that if a wrapper
> > > can do it for us it's safest. Or if the ide can do it on
Op Wed, 18 Jul 2007, schreef Michael Van Canneyt:
> On Wed, 18 Jul 2007, Ales( Katona wrote:
>
> > Why? You have your good ol' PING doing it. I agree tho that if a wrapper
> > can do it for us it's safest. Or if the ide can do it on start, and
> > always setuid(userid) itself right after settin
Op Wed, 18 Jul 2007, schreef Jonas Maebe:
>
> On 17 Jul 2007, at 23:20, Marco van de Voort wrote:
>
> > > The result is that the keyboard unit is no longer able to catch keys
> > > like
> > > escape, shift+tab alt+F1..F12 etc. on the Linux console. This affects
> > > the
> > > Free Pascal IDE
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007, Ales( Katona wrote:
> Why? You have your good ol' PING doing it. I agree tho that if a wrapper
> can do it for us it's safest. Or if the ide can do it on start, and
> always setuid(userid) itself right after setting the proper things. I
> don't see a problem with ANY program
Op Wed, 18 Jul 2007, schreef Sergei Gorelkin:
> Jonas Maebe wrote:
> >
> > On 18 Jul 2007, at 14:08, Jonas Maebe wrote:
> >
> > > > Install the IDE setuid.
> > >
> > > That would be an extremely bad idea with the current stability record
> > > of the IDE.
> >
> > Not to mention that it allow
Op Wed, 18 Jul 2007, schreef Michael Van Canneyt:
>
>
> On Wed, 18 Jul 2007, Marco van de Voort wrote:
>
> > > On 18 Jul 2007, at 14:08, Jonas Maebe wrote:
> > >
> > > >> Install the IDE setuid.
> > > >
> > > > That would be an extremely bad idea with the current stability
> > > > record o
Ales wrote:
Strawman yes, but if we setuid to userid right after setting the console
stuff, there's nothing left to audit. We're not malicious software
makers so there's no chance anything else could happen? Or am I missing
something here?
eg:
fp starts
fp sets itself to uid 0
fp sets the requi
Strawman yes, but if we setuid to userid right after setting the console
stuff, there's nothing left to audit. We're not malicious software
makers so there's no chance anything else could happen? Or am I missing
something here?
eg:
fp starts
fp sets itself to uid 0
fp sets the required things as
Ales wrote:
Why? You have your good ol' PING doing it.
Unbelievable strawman argument there.
This is not at all a critique of the IDE, but please don't compare the
complexity of "ping" and "fpide"(!)
I agree tho that if a wrapper can do it for us it's safest. Or if the
ide can do it on start
Why? You have your good ol' PING doing it. I agree tho that if a wrapper
can do it for us it's safest. Or if the ide can do it on start, and
always setuid(userid) itself right after setting the proper things. I
don't see a problem with ANY program being setuid if it has a proper
reason, and is audi
Ales wrote:
And to add to my last setuid stuff.. I think that if we properly audit
the IDE code so that:
a) fpc is called in the uid of the original ide starter
b) the "console" is run in the uid of the original ide starter
c) compiler programs are called in the uid of the original IDE starter
Ales wrote:
While I agree that it could cause some PR trouble, I don't see how this
is our problem. It's not like anyone blames the software makers for
windows security issues...
You cannot seriously mean that. I agree 100% with Jonas here. PLEASE
rethink your position Ales :-)
--
Regards,
C
Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007, Marco van de Voort wrote:
On 18 Jul 2007, at 14:08, Jonas Maebe wrote:
Install the IDE setuid.
That would be an extremely bad idea with the current stability
record of the IDE.
Not to mention that it allows you to open and overwrite any arbit
And to add to my last setuid stuff.. I think that if we properly audit
the IDE code so that:
a) fpc is called in the uid of the original ide starter
b) the "console" is run in the uid of the original ide starter
c) compiler programs are called in the uid of the original IDE starter
I think it's o
O/H Vincent Snijders έγραψε:
Mark - WBIsoft.COM schreef:
I think the calling convention be STDCALL ?
IIRC, that is the same on win64.
Are you sure about this ?
AFAIK, they have opposite order of arguments in stack. In cdecl caller
will clean up stack after the call (raise ESP) while in
Jonas Maebe wrote / napísal(a):
Oh and btw, setuid is generaly used afaik. It's a normal thing to allow
temporary root access on normal programs in linux. Ofcourse doing it on
something like fpIDE is somewhat questionable (heh the possibilities
:D), but I don't see it as such a great risk. The mo
Why? If they allow it it's their problem. If there's no sane way to do
something and we do it this way it's their problem that it's allowed...
I just don't see as how this whole thing is "our" problem.
I guess we could ask on install, "do you want a rootkit or no shortcuts?"...
>
> This has nothi
Luc Vigato, Sita Software schreef:
Here an little test DLL (SitaUdfLib.pas). It also don't work with firebird
2.1 64bit version.
How can I test this, without installing firebird?
Do you have another host application?
Vincent
___
fpc-devel maillist
> On 18 Jul 2007, at 17:42, Marco van de Voort wrote:
>
> >> arguments like "the kernel forcing us to do so" will not help us
> >> then.
> >
> > What is the security hole exactly?
>
> If you install the IDE as setuid root, then every user starting the
> IDE will run the IDE as if he were root
On 18 Jul 2007, at 18:01, Ales( Katona <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
While I agree that it could cause some PR trouble, I don't see how
this
is our problem. It's not like anyone blames the software makers for
windows security issues...
This has nothing at all to do with "pr trouble", but w
Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Jul 2007, Marco van de Voort wrote:
>> > On 18 Jul 2007, at 14:08, Jonas Maebe wrote:
>> >
>> > >> Install the IDE setuid.
>> > >
>> > > That would be an extremely bad idea with the current stability
>> > > record of the IDE.
>> >
>> > Not to mention that it
While I agree that it could cause some PR trouble, I don't see how this
is our problem. It's not like anyone blames the software makers for
windows security issues...
>
> If you install the IDE as setuid root, then every user starting the
> IDE will run the IDE as if he were root. That means he can
On 18 Jul 2007, at 17:42, Marco van de Voort wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007, Marco van de Voort wrote:
On 18 Jul 2007, at 14:08, Jonas Maebe wrote:
Install the IDE setuid.
That would be an extremely bad idea with the current stability
record of the IDE.
Not to mention that it allows you to
> On Wed, 18 Jul 2007, Marco van de Voort wrote:
>
> > > On 18 Jul 2007, at 14:08, Jonas Maebe wrote:
> > >
> > > >> Install the IDE setuid.
> > > >
> > > > That would be an extremely bad idea with the current stability
> > > > record of the IDE.
> > >
> > > Not to mention that it allows you t
> On Tuesday 17 July 2007 11:20:54 pm Marco van de Voort wrote:
> > > Apparently someone suddenly got a good idea that you need to be root to
> > > reprogram the keyboard, and got a patch merged into the Linux kernel:
> > >
> > > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=co
Here an little test DLL (SitaUdfLib.pas). It also don't work with firebird
2.1 64bit version.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Felipe Monteiro
de Carvalho
Sent: mercredi 18 juillet 2007 16:48
To: FPC developers' list
Subject: Re: [fpc-de
On Tuesday 17 July 2007 11:20:54 pm Marco van de Voort wrote:
> > Apparently someone suddenly got a good idea that you need to be root to
> > reprogram the keyboard, and got a patch merged into the Linux kernel:
> >
> > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit
> >di
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007, Marco van de Voort wrote:
> > On 18 Jul 2007, at 14:08, Jonas Maebe wrote:
> >
> > >> Install the IDE setuid.
> > >
> > > That would be an extremely bad idea with the current stability
> > > record of the IDE.
> >
> > Not to mention that it allows you to open and overwri
On 7/18/07, Luc Vigato, Sita Software <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The export table seems to be OK, but from where comes the error "Entry point
not found"? I don't have any idea. I'm open for all suggestions.
Try to reproduce with a small DLL (the smaller the better). And then
post the source cod
The export table seems to be OK, but from where comes the error "Entry point
not found"? I don't have any idea. I'm open for all suggestions.
Result of MiTeC EXE explorer.
Dump of file \\pc-luc\DeRaoul\SitaUdfLib.dll
Created by EXE Explorer 1.0.0.0 - Copyright C 2006 Michal Mutl
DOS HEADER
Ok, try the MiTeC EXE explorer from http://www.mitec.cz
I use it for my 64bit windows dll's
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
> On 18 Jul 2007, at 14:08, Jonas Maebe wrote:
>
> >> Install the IDE setuid.
> >
> > That would be an extremely bad idea with the current stability
> > record of the IDE.
>
> Not to mention that it allows you to open and overwrite any arbitrary
> file.
Yes. Just like we all have for decades
What is the purpose of the tlibrary3 test:
http://www.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/trunk/tests/test/tlibrary3.pp?view=markup
It does not compile on win64, because there is no unit initc, because there is not
cygwin.dll for win64.
Vincent
___
fp
Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 18 Jul 2007, at 14:08, Jonas Maebe wrote:
Install the IDE setuid.
That would be an extremely bad idea with the current stability record
of the IDE.
Not to mention that it allows you to open and overwrite any arbitrary file.
Looking at that kernel patch, I see that
Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
Ah- the kernel buffer is full of "Kernel unaligned access" messages.
What I can't say is whether this is the result of testing or because of
something that was being done on this machine a few minutes ago, however
this is suspiciously similar to the fault I was getting
On 18 Jul 2007, at 14:08, Jonas Maebe wrote:
Install the IDE setuid.
That would be an extremely bad idea with the current stability
record of the IDE.
Not to mention that it allows you to open and overwrite any arbitrary
file.
Jonas
___
fpc
On 17 Jul 2007, at 23:20, Marco van de Voort wrote:
The result is that the keyboard unit is no longer able to catch
keys like
escape, shift+tab alt+F1..F12 etc. on the Linux console. This
affects the
Free Pascal IDE and any other program using the keyboard unit.
Install the IDE setuid.
On 17 Jul 2007, at 23:43, Micha Nelissen wrote:
SignalToRunError is a signal handler, but it calls an ErrorProc
calling
many functions, like CRelocateThreadVar (for accessing the exception
stack), GetMem (to allocate an exception object); are these functions
guaranteed to run correctly in a s
I have tried at the moment the DLL only with PE Explorer PE Explorer gives
an error . I don't know about other dependancy checker. When you give me an
other depandancy checker I try it.
When loading DLL with PE Explorer
18.07.2007 13:47:09 : Open File: D:\Fichiers echange\DeRaoul\SitaUdfLib.dll
1
Wasn't aware CDECL on Win64 was the same as STDCALL, if so then is the
export table correct - have you checked with a dependancy checker ?
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Mark - WBIsoft.COM schreef:
I think the calling convention be STDCALL ?
IIRC, that is the same on win64.
Vincent
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
I think the calling convention be STDCALL ?
Mark
- Original Message -
From: "Luc Vigato, Sita Software" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 10:43 AM
Subject: [fpc-devel] DLL WIN64: Entry point not found
Hello,
I have compiled a DLL under Win64. It's a UDF-libr
Hello,
I have compiled a DLL under Win64. It's a UDF-library for Firbird 2.1.
Under Linux 64bit all things are working, only in WIN64 not.
The problem is that Firebird says that he cannot find the Entry Point of
each of my functions.
It's not a Firebird problem, i have made a test application who
Thanks, Jonas. I will deep inside it.
2007/7/16, Jonas Maebe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On 14 Jul 2007, at 16:01, Evgeniy Ivanov wrote:
> I'm doing sdlgraph - so I put my self to packages/base/graph.
graph probably has to be moved to packages/extra, so it can easily
use things like sdl and the (Ma
59 matches
Mail list logo
