Re: ld.so speedup (part 2)

2019-04-27 Thread Ian McWilliam
On 28/4/19, 12:56 am, "owner-t...@openbsd.org on behalf of Otto Moerbeek" wrote: >On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 04:43:14PM +0200, Otto Moerbeek wrote: > >> On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 04:37:23PM +0200, Antoine Jacoutot wrote: >> >> > On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 09:55:33PM +0800, Nathanael Rensen wrote: >>

Re: Conditional sysupgrade

2019-04-27 Thread Florian Obser
On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 09:53:08PM +0200, Mischa Peters wrote: > Let me know if this needs more work. Love the idea of sysupgrade! Please shelf this for now, there is a lot of churn going on in the tool in private and we are moving very fast. There are more subtleties to consider. -- I'm not

Re: Conditional sysupgrade

2019-04-27 Thread Theo Buehler
On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 02:16:26PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote: > Florian Obser wrote: > > > It has the date and time with seconds resolution in there. Not just the > > built number. > > Yes from KARL on one machine, and snapshot/release builds on a different > machine. > > Could this not

Re: Conditional sysupgrade

2019-04-27 Thread Theo de Raadt
Florian Obser wrote: > It has the date and time with seconds resolution in there. Not just the built > number. Yes from KARL on one machine, and snapshot/release builds on a different machine. Could this not false-positive? > On April 27, 2019 9:57:59 PM GMT+02:00, Theo de Raadt > wrote: >

Re: Conditional sysupgrade

2019-04-27 Thread Florian Obser
It has the date and time with seconds resolution in there. Not just the built number. On April 27, 2019 9:57:59 PM GMT+02:00, Theo de Raadt wrote: >> As Florian suggested I compared kern.version to what from both bsd >and bsd.mp. > >Do not do that. > >kern.version in snapshots and releases are

Re: Conditional sysupgrade

2019-04-27 Thread Theo de Raadt
> As Florian suggested I compared kern.version to what from both bsd and bsd.mp. Do not do that. kern.version in snapshots and releases are completely arbitrary, based on whether I delete an obj tree, then the version numbers begin anew. This heuristic will false-positive.

Re: Conditional sysupgrade

2019-04-27 Thread Mischa Peters
On 27 Apr at 17:52, Florian Obser wrote: > On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 01:23:20PM +0100, Marco Bonetti wrote: > > Hello folks, > > > > First of all congratulations on a new OpenBSD release and thanks for > > introducing sysupgrade in -current. > > > > Before sysupgrade, I was using a custom script

Re: Conditional sysupgrade

2019-04-27 Thread Christian Weisgerber
On 2019-04-27, Marco Bonetti wrote: > +unpriv -f SHA256.sig.tmp ftp -Vmo SHA256.sig.tmp ${URL}SHA256.sig > +TMP_SHA=$(sha256 -q SHA256.sig.tmp) > + > +unpriv touch SHA256.sig This fails if SHA256.sig doesn't exist yet. The unprivileged user cannot create files in $SETSDIR. > +unpriv cat

Re: route(4) manual and sockaddrs; ROUNDUP()

2019-04-27 Thread Vadim Penzin
Well, the manual shall tell the truth, whatever it is: Messages are formed by a header followed by a small number of sockaddr structures of variable length. The size of every sockaddr structure can be computed by rounding the value of the `sa_len' field of the current structure

Re: Conditional sysupgrade

2019-04-27 Thread Florian Obser
On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 01:23:20PM +0100, Marco Bonetti wrote: > Hello folks, > > First of all congratulations on a new OpenBSD release and thanks for > introducing sysupgrade in -current. > > Before sysupgrade, I was using a custom script for achieving the same > result with only difference

Re: ld.so speedup (part 2)

2019-04-27 Thread Otto Moerbeek
On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 04:43:14PM +0200, Otto Moerbeek wrote: > On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 04:37:23PM +0200, Antoine Jacoutot wrote: > > > On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 09:55:33PM +0800, Nathanael Rensen wrote: > > > The diff below speeds up ld.so library intialisation where the dependency > > > tree is

Re: ld.so speedup (part 2)

2019-04-27 Thread Otto Moerbeek
On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 04:37:23PM +0200, Antoine Jacoutot wrote: > On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 09:55:33PM +0800, Nathanael Rensen wrote: > > The diff below speeds up ld.so library intialisation where the dependency > > tree is broad and deep, such as samba's smbd which links over 100 libraries. > >

Re: ld.so speedup (part 2)

2019-04-27 Thread Antoine Jacoutot
On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 09:55:33PM +0800, Nathanael Rensen wrote: > The diff below speeds up ld.so library intialisation where the dependency > tree is broad and deep, such as samba's smbd which links over 100 libraries. > > See for example https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc=155007285712913=2 > >

Re: Conditional sysupgrade

2019-04-27 Thread Andreas Kusalananda Kähäri
On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 01:23:20PM +0100, Marco Bonetti wrote: > Hello folks, > > First of all congratulations on a new OpenBSD release and thanks for > introducing sysupgrade in -current. > > Before sysupgrade, I was using a custom script for achieving the same > result with only difference

ld.so speedup (part 2)

2019-04-27 Thread Nathanael Rensen
The diff below speeds up ld.so library intialisation where the dependency tree is broad and deep, such as samba's smbd which links over 100 libraries. See for example https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc=155007285712913=2 See https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-tech=155637285221396=2 for part 1 that

ld.so speedup (part 1)

2019-04-27 Thread Nathanael Rensen
The diff below speeds up ld.so library loading where the dependency tree is broad and deep, such as samba's smbd which links over 100 libraries. See for example https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc=155007285712913=2 The timings below are for ldd /usr/local/sbin/smbd: Timing without diff: 2m02.50s

Conditional sysupgrade

2019-04-27 Thread Marco Bonetti
Hello folks, First of all congratulations on a new OpenBSD release and thanks for introducing sysupgrade in -current. Before sysupgrade, I was using a custom script for achieving the same result with only difference that I was checking if a new snapshot (or release) is available by looking at