On Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 06:28:11PM +, Piotr Kaczuba wrote:
> I have been experiencing the same problem with xserver 4.3.0.dfsg.1-10,
> even with noexec=off. The symptoms were signal 11 on first xfree module
> load and strace showing that mprotect failed with EINVAL.
> The problem was that t
I have been experiencing the same problem with xserver 4.3.0.dfsg.1-10,
even with noexec=off. The symptoms were signal 11 on first xfree module
load and strace showing that mprotect failed with EINVAL.
The problem was that the address passed to mprotect wasn't aligned to
the pagesize (4096).
On Mon, Oct 25, 2004 at 01:41:43PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> Is there a reason you didn't submit this information as follow-up to
> #277699?
I did look through the bug list to see if it was already reported, but for
some reason I missed that one. I don't remember what I was thinking at th
severity 277884 important
merge 277699 277884
thanks
On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 02:29:28AM -0300, Peter Cordes wrote:
> background: AMD64 NX support works in 32bit and 64bit mode. It adds an
> exec permission bit to PAE page tables, so PROT_READ is separate from
> PROT_EXEC. Since it only works w
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> severity 277884 important
Bug#277884: xserver-xfree86: X segfaults on AMD64 with noexec enabled
Severity set to `important'.
> merge 277699 277884
Bug#277699: xserver-xfree86: [elfloader] SEGV when using NX-enabled kernel
Bug#277884: xser
Package: xserver-xfree86
Version: 4.3.0.dfsg.1-8
Severity: normal
background: AMD64 NX support works in 32bit and 64bit mode. It adds an
exec permission bit to PAE page tables, so PROT_READ is separate from
PROT_EXEC. Since it only works with 3rd level page tables, not plain x86
ones, it only
6 matches
Mail list logo
