e, 'sh' is the very common. I see
around 157 users of this pattern. 13 use /bin/sh directly. Also consider
that it is highly likely, if not required, that a /bin/sh will exist.
Calling 'sh' specifically is definitely more proper than ${SHELL} since
it is an sh script.
--
Regards,
Bryan Drewery
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
e that I was applying local patches to the tree
before buildworld, then reverting the patches before installworld. This
changed timestamps of various source files that forced the rebuild
during installworld. The real solution was to not revert the files until
after installworld and to not change the
LAGS
> blank, whatever you did with LIB_{CFLAGS,LDFLAGS}.
>
> This won't happen without -fPIE here, because a non-hidden symbol
> will be emitted in that case.
>
>
>
> ___
> freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
>
--
Regards,
Bryan Drewery
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On 12/3/2012 11:09 AM, rank1see...@gmail.com wrote:
> I've noticed this under 9.0-RELEASE-p5
>
>
> #!/bin/sh
> #
> ftest_dot ()
> {
> local i
>
> for i in $*
> {
> echo "$i"
> }
> }
>
> ftest_monkey ()
> {
> local i
tat(1).
Guessing the kldstat(1) and netstat(1) deadlocked initially.
--
Regards,
Bryan Drewery
bdrewery@freenode/EFNet
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
On 11/21/2012 8:21 PM, Devin Teske wrote:
>
> On Nov 21, 2012, at 5:58 PM, Eitan Adler wrote:
>
>> I've been working on removing obsolete information various documents.
>> While going through older articles I noticed a few references to the
>> "old style" kernel configuration involving running co
On 10/27/2012 9:40 AM, Eitan Adler wrote:
> On 27 October 2012 10:34, Chris Rees wrote:
>>> This "weeks" is making a assumptions that users 1. reads ports@ or 2.
>>> Update to security/errata patches in a timely manner or 3. Read UPDATING
>>
>> Quite. This should be at least a few months, otherwi
On 10/27/2012 8:23 AM, Chris Rees wrote:
> [trim CC list a little to stop people regretting replying to this thread]
>
> On 27 October 2012 10:15, Chris Rees wrote:
>>
>> On 27 Oct 2012 00:35, "Simon J. Gerraty" wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, 26 Oct 2012 22:02:00 +0100, Chris Rees writes:
In th
eebsd.git
git://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-doc.git
git://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-ports.git (the preferred sources)
--
Regards,
Bryan Drewery
bdrewery@freenode/EFNet
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
am.
>
> Alternatively, the daemon could be a setgid program that is spawned by
> the utmpx APIs when needed.
I like this idea a lot.
I will experiment with that.
--
Regards,
Bryan Drewery
bdrewery@freenode, bryan@EFNet
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On 6/5/2012 9:06 AM, Ed Schouten wrote:
> Hi Bryan,
>
> 2012/6/4 Bryan Drewery :
>> * Added utmp group
>
> Why call it utmp? FreeBSD 9+ does not do utmp. It does utmpx. Also,
> too many pieces of software already abuse the group `utmp'. Instead of
> doing utmp
On 6/4/2012 8:17 AM, Bryan Drewery wrote:
>
>
> On 6/4/2012 4:42 AM, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
>> A library is definiately a better place, although then I wouldn't pass
>> see_other_uids as an argument, but obtain it within the function itself.
>
> Does libc m
On 6/4/2012 4:42 AM, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
> A library is definiately a better place, although then I wouldn't pass
> see_other_uids as an argument, but obtain it within the function itself.
Does libc make sense for this? I'm thinking yes since it's where the utx
functions live.
In particu
On 6/4/2012 4:42 AM, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 03, 2012 at 08:42:04PM -0500, Bryan Drewery wrote:
>> Questions:
>>
>> To add this support to w(1) and who(1), I want to share the
>> is_user_restricted() function among all 3 binaries. I don't thin
my changes belong in utx functions in
libc. Thus all utx readers would benefit and solve my sharing problem.
The readers/clients would still need to be setgid(utmp) though to open
the utx files.
I still need to update the relevant man pages for these changes as well.
Regards,
Bryan Drewery
On 5/27/2012 10:06 PM, Bryan Drewery wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As reported in bin/146189, script(1) was returning the wrong exit status
> sometimes.
>
> The PR says that script(1) was broken by r205008/r205635, neither of
> which are in 7-stable or releng/7.4. Yet it is broken
return code
cannot be relied on for automated scripts. I am wondering what the
thoughts are on putting this patch out as an errata?
Regards,
Bryan Drewery
[1] http://www.freebsd.org/security/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozi
conf
>
> However, even up to now in REL 9.0, there is no reference to it, in
> man pages. -- daily_status_security_chkportsum_enable= -- ..., is
> missing.
>
Thank you for your report.
I've filed a PR with patch to update the manpage and CC'd you.
Regards,
Bryan Drewery
--
ut that setting fetchTimeout > 0 fixes this problem.
It's been set to 30 in pkgng now.
Regards,
Bryan Drewery
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJPotbaAAoJEG54KsA8mwz5WxU
. Are there plans to resume this work?
Regards,
Bryan Drewery
[1] (rwatson)
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/2005-November/019458.html
[2] http://people.freebsd.org/~kib/quotagiant/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla
On 4/26/2012 5:45 AM, Jeremie Le Hen wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 02:30:33PM -0500, Bryan Drewery wrote:
>>
>> Something to keep an eye on is that some ports may run `file
>> /usr/lib/libc.so` and find that it is an ASCII text file.
>>
>> As I've menti
On 03/15/2012 05:34 PM, Jeremie Le Hen wrote:
> Hi Bryan
>
> On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 09:41:07PM -0600, Bryan Drewery wrote:
>>
>> Thanks for this patch [1]!
>>
>> I've been building my ports tree with -fstack-protector on FreeBSD 6, 7
>> and 8. Once
this. Specifically, the application is
linking in security/openssl statically, which of course was compiled
with -fstack-protector. Adding the /usr/lib/libc.ld fixed it without
needing to hack at the failing non-port application.
Would be nice if this, and PR 138228 were finally committed.
Bryan Drewer
23 matches
Mail list logo
