I tried a /usr/sbin/traceroute from a chroot that had been built using
WITH_UBSAN= in use. It got the common lib/libc/stdio/fread.c zero offset
to null pointer notice but also reported "member access within misaligned
address" for types:
'struct ifreq', which requires 8 by
IPSEC is hard-defined into the Makefile...not good, especially for
PicoBSD.
-- snip --
--- /usr/src/usr.sbin/traceroute/Makefile.orig Thu Mar 30 14:16:52 2000
+++ /usr/src/usr.sbin/traceroute/Makefile Thu Mar 30 14:23:28 2000
@@ -5,4 +5,11 @@
BINMODE=4555
+
+.ifndef (NOIPSEC)
CFLAGS
Nevermind, I had nosuid in fstab, totally forgot
about it.
- Original Message -
From:
David W.
Chapman Jr.
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 1999 3:54
PM
Subject: su and traceroute
I just cvsuped to -current right after bind-8.2.2
was
I just cvsuped to -current right after bind-8.2.2
was merged into the source tree. I noticed two problems. Su won't
work and traceroute gives me the following
traceroute: icmp socket: Operation not
permitted
here are its permissions
-r-sr-xr-x 1 root wheel 12076
Dec 1 14:15
Karl Pielorz writes:
> > I just noticed that traceroute in -current is starting its probes
> > with port 1 instead of 33435 as it is supposed to do:
> >
> > tcpdump: listening on fxp0
> > 09:05:03.527313 206.213.73.12.38947 > 204.216.27.21.1: udp 12 [ttl 1]
&g
John Polstra wrote:
>
> I just noticed that traceroute in -current is starting its probes
> with port 1 instead of 33435 as it is supposed to do:
>
> tcpdump: listening on fxp0
> 09:05:03.527313 206.213.73.12.38947 > 204.216.27.21.1: udp 12 [ttl 1]
>
> It broke in r
I just noticed that traceroute in -current is starting its probes
with port 1 instead of 33435 as it is supposed to do:
tcpdump: listening on fxp0
09:05:03.527313 206.213.73.12.38947 > 204.216.27.21.1: udp 12 [ttl 1]
09:05:03.532569 206.213.73.12.38947 > 204.216.27.21.2: udp 12 [ttl 1]
Archie Cobbs writes:
> I have this patch for traceroute that adds the ability to send
> packets with an arbitrary IP protocol number, instead of just TCP
> and UDP. This is mainly useful to see if some router between points
> A and B is blocking packets based on IP protocol number.
&g
On Mon, 3 May 1999, Archie Cobbs wrote:
> Johan Granlund writes:
> > How is it going with netgraph?
> > I have looked at the -net archives on and off and it's very quit.
> > Is it still going to be committed?
>
> Netgraph is doing well.. several people have tried it and/or are using it.
> One g
Johan Granlund writes:
> How is it going with netgraph?
> I have looked at the -net archives on and off and it's very quit.
> Is it still going to be committed?
Netgraph is doing well.. several people have tried it and/or are using it.
One guy in Finland has reimplemented the whole concept in Java
On Mon, 3 May 1999, Archie Cobbs wrote:
> I have this patch for traceroute that adds the ability to send
[snip]
How is it going with netgraph?
I have looked at the -net archives on and off and it's very quit.
Is it still going to be committed?
/Johan
>
I have this patch for traceroute that adds the ability to send
packets with an arbitrary IP protocol number, instead of just TCP
and UDP. This is mainly useful to see if some router between points
A and B is blocking packets based on IP protocol number.
I sent it to "tracero...@ee.lbl.gov
12 matches
Mail list logo
