On Fri, 2020-04-03 at 07:23 -0700, Khem Raj wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 6:36 AM Richard Purdie
> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2020-03-31 at 12:57 +0200, Jan Luebbe wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On Mon, 2020-01-20 at 17:10 +, Ross Burton wrote:
> > > > On 20/01/2020 15:45, Khem Raj wrote:
> > > > >
On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 6:36 AM Richard Purdie
wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2020-03-31 at 12:57 +0200, Jan Luebbe wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Mon, 2020-01-20 at 17:10 +, Ross Burton wrote:
> > > On 20/01/2020 15:45, Khem Raj wrote:
> > > > pseudo needs some love since it alters syscalls which go out of
>
On Tue, 2020-03-31 at 12:57 +0200, Jan Luebbe wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 2020-01-20 at 17:10 +, Ross Burton wrote:
> > On 20/01/2020 15:45, Khem Raj wrote:
> > > pseudo needs some love since it alters syscalls which go out of
> > > bounds
> > > what is allowed by libseccomp until then pin your
On Tue, 2020-03-31 at 12:57 +0200, Jan Luebbe wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 2020-01-20 at 17:10 +, Ross Burton wrote:
> > On 20/01/2020 15:45, Khem Raj wrote:
> > > pseudo needs some love since it alters syscalls which go out of
> > > bounds
> > > what is allowed by libseccomp until then pin your
Hi,
On Mon, 2020-01-20 at 17:10 +, Ross Burton wrote:
> On 20/01/2020 15:45, Khem Raj wrote:
> > pseudo needs some love since it alters syscalls which go out of bounds
> > what is allowed by libseccomp until then pin your file version to 5.37
> > in arch till a supported distro is affected by
On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 9:10 AM Ross Burton wrote:
> On 20/01/2020 15:45, Khem Raj wrote:
> > pseudo needs some love since it alters syscalls which go out of bounds
> > what is allowed by libseccomp until then pin your file version to 5.37
> > in arch till a supported distro is affected by same
On 20/01/2020 15:45, Khem Raj wrote:
pseudo needs some love since it alters syscalls which go out of bounds
what is allowed by libseccomp until then pin your file version to 5.37
in arch till a supported distro is affected by same problem. It wont
be long better option is to fix pseudo
That's
On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 4:53 AM Martin Hundebøll wrote:
>
> On 18/10/2019 23.28, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > On Fri, 2019-10-18 at 18:03 +0530, Khem Raj wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 4:58 PM Ross Burton
> >> wrote:
> >>> file will automatically enable seccomp if the seccomp headers
On 18/10/2019 23.28, Richard Purdie wrote:
On Fri, 2019-10-18 at 18:03 +0530, Khem Raj wrote:
On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 4:58 PM Ross Burton
wrote:
file will automatically enable seccomp if the seccomp headers are
available, but
the build will fail on Opensuse Tumbleweed because the include
On Sat, Oct 19, 2019 at 2:58 AM Richard Purdie <
richard.pur...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 2019-10-18 at 18:03 +0530, Khem Raj wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 4:58 PM Ross Burton
> > wrote:
> > > file will automatically enable seccomp if the seccomp headers are
> > >
On Fri, 2019-10-18 at 18:03 +0530, Khem Raj wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 4:58 PM Ross Burton
> wrote:
> > file will automatically enable seccomp if the seccomp headers are
> > available, but
> > the build will fail on Opensuse Tumbleweed because the include
> > paths are wrong.
> >
> >
On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 4:58 PM Ross Burton wrote:
> file will automatically enable seccomp if the seccomp headers are
> available, but
> the build will fail on Opensuse Tumbleweed because the include paths are
> wrong.
>
> Enabling seccomp is a bad idea because it interacts badly with pseudo
>
file will automatically enable seccomp if the seccomp headers are available, but
the build will fail on Opensuse Tumbleweed because the include paths are wrong.
Enabling seccomp is a bad idea because it interacts badly with pseudo (causing
build failures), so explicitly and globally disable
13 matches
Mail list logo
