> Right. The feature is however still somehow interesting, so I prefered
> to just disable the support by default, so users can easily build their
> own exec server and set it up for themselves if they wish.
Doing this in the exec server was always just a cheap hack because we
didn't have a transl
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 12:52:39PM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Justus Winter, le Thu 29 Aug 2013 12:41:47 +0200, a écrit :
> > But couldn't the same be achieved by installing an unzipping storeio
> > translator on the zipped executable? It is more explicit, but I'd
> > argue that this is a good
Justus Winter, le Thu 29 Aug 2013 13:06:03 +0200, a écrit :
> Umm, I just tested this, and it doesn't work :/ I guess b/c storeio
> claims that it is a character device:
> % ls -l /tmp/hello.unzipped
> crwxr-xr-x 1 teythoon teythoon 0, 0 Aug 29 13:01 /tmp/hello.unzipped
Character device? That shou
Quoting Samuel Thibault (2013-08-29 12:52:39)
> Justus Winter, le Thu 29 Aug 2013 12:41:47 +0200, a écrit :
> > > At least to show flexibility of the exec server. The difference between
> > > the BFD code and the gzip/bzip2 code is that the latter makes the whole
> > > exec code complex, while the
Justus Winter, le Thu 29 Aug 2013 12:41:47 +0200, a écrit :
> > At least to show flexibility of the exec server. The difference between
> > the BFD code and the gzip/bzip2 code is that the latter makes the whole
> > exec code complex, while the gzip/bzip2 support only has a couple of
> > hooks, so
Quoting Samuel Thibault (2013-08-29 12:32:50)
> Justus Winter, le Thu 29 Aug 2013 12:16:11 +0200, a écrit :
> > The patches were also ment to address the complexity^Wsheer size of
> > the code. That is why I wanted to remove them, #ifdef'ing it out has a
> > cost, not a runtime one but for anyone h
Justus Winter, le Thu 29 Aug 2013 12:16:11 +0200, a écrit :
> The patches were also ment to address the complexity^Wsheer size of
> the code. That is why I wanted to remove them, #ifdef'ing it out has a
> cost, not a runtime one but for anyone hacking on /hurd/exec.
Yes, the BFD code was making th
Quoting Samuel Thibault (2013-08-28 23:56:10)
> Hello,
>
> Justus Winter, le Thu 15 Aug 2013 18:41:50 +0200, a écrit :
> > Remove support for transparently unbzip2ing executables from the exec
> > server. The code in question makes the exec server unnecessarily
> > complex and since the exec serve
Hello,
Justus Winter, le Thu 15 Aug 2013 18:41:50 +0200, a écrit :
> Remove support for transparently unbzip2ing executables from the exec
> server. The code in question makes the exec server unnecessarily
> complex and since the exec server is an essential process, crashing it
> makes /hurd/init
