if someone's interested, here a list of fs differences
between 6.0 upgraded from 5.9, and 6.0 install, i found,
with some obvious differences like smtpd spool or sysmerge
backups removed (amd64/qemu):
http://pastebin.com/raw/VPkdbvxy (text/plain)
(not pasting because of long lines)
hth
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 3, 2016, at 12:46 PM, Michal Bozon wrote:
>> good(?) news: sysmerge is gone in 6.0
>> but not removed by 5.9 to 6.0 uprade process.
>
> s/sysmerge/systrace/
>
pledge()
> > good(?) news: sysmerge is gone in 6.0
> > but not removed by 5.9 to 6.0 uprade process.
> >
>
> I really have a hard time understanding what you're trying to point out.
>
> Yes, systrace is gone, but it's an ordinary binary that does no harm,
> feel free to remove it if it makes you feel bet
> good(?) news: sysmerge is gone in 6.0
> but not removed by 5.9 to 6.0 uprade process.
s/sysmerge/systrace/
On Sat, Sep 03, 2016 at 05:37:22PM +, Michal Bozon wrote:
> > Why?
>
> good(?) news: sysmerge is gone in 6.0
> but not removed by 5.9 to 6.0 uprade process.
>
I really have a hard time understanding what you're trying to point out.
Yes, systrace is gone, but it's an ordinary binary that doe
> Why?
good(?) news: sysmerge is gone in 6.0
but not removed by 5.9 to 6.0 uprade process.
On 2016-04-27, Marc Espie wrote:
> Race-conditiony things that make you go hum, oh shit is this thing
> more dangerous than what it's actually potecting. Plus semantic bugs.
> Like the time we had to hunt a really weird copy bug in the qt code until
> we realized it was just systrace fucking up.
There were some significant issues with systrace over the years.
Race-conditiony things that make you go hum, oh shit is this thing
more dangerous than what it's actually potecting. Plus semantic bugs.
Like the time we had to hunt a really weird copy bug in the qt code until
we realized it was jus
> it is not important.
>
> systrace was effectively deprecated 4-10 years ago, when there stopped
> being a maintainer for it, or the broken ecosystem surrounding.
>
> That was a gap needed to consider a replacement model.
>
> What do you want here?
I guess nothing important.
I am happy with p
>> how do you mean? what happens on 5.9 when you use systrace with pledged
>> programs? Does cpu usage go through the roof by any chance? That would
>> explain why I have had to disable it to avoid waiting so long for
>> systraced desktop programs.
>
>hmmm, actually I guess the claws-mail port may
>> > Unfortunately systrace overhead can be significant for monitoring
>> > complex programs but it could potentially be useful as a part of a
>> > (HIPS or system intrusion or malfunction detection for a secure
>> > server). hmmm, assuming pledge doesn't kill the offending process first,
>> > haha
> how do you mean? what happens on 5.9 when you use systrace with pledged
> programs? Does cpu usage go through the roof by any chance? That would
> explain why I have had to disable it to avoid waiting so long for
> systraced desktop programs.
hmmm, actually I guess the claws-mail port may not be
> > Unfortunately systrace overhead can be significant for monitoring
> > complex programs but it could potentially be useful as a part of a
> > (HIPS or system intrusion or malfunction detection for a secure
> > server). hmmm, assuming pledge doesn't kill the offending process first,
> > haha.
>
> > I guess the question is: how many people actually use systrace in
> > scripts? Probably very very few.
>From yesterday onwards, noone uses it.
> I use it in scripts but will look to switching to pledge when I
> have time, which I *should* be able to find in the next 6 months, haha.
> It is ho
> I guess the question is: how many people actually use systrace in
> scripts? Probably very very few.
I use it in scripts but will look to switching to pledge when I
have time, which I *should* be able to find in the next 6 months, haha.
It is however sometimes insightful as a quick and dirty deb
On 2016-04-26, arrowscr...@mail.com wrote:
> Of course, you can put it on packages
Nope.
arrowscr...@mail.com wrote:
> I know about the pledge(2) development, but systrace and pledge are
> not mutually exclusive. Pledge need to be used inline, where systrace
> can be used as a command line tool.
>
> If you remove it, many scripts that use systrace for privilege
> reduction will broke
I know about the pledge(2) development, but systrace and pledge are not
mutually exclusive. Pledge need to be used inline, where systrace can be used
as a command line tool.
If you remove it, many scripts that use systrace for privilege reduction will
broke.
Of course, you can put it on package
Why not? In a more serious way, read misc@ and tech@ particuarly in the
subject about pledge.
-luis
On Monday, 25 April 2016, wrote:
> Why?
Why?
20 matches
Mail list logo