On Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 10:31:18AM -0500, Dan Langille wrote:
> If a process starts up and does a setuid, should it be writing the
> PID file before or after the setuid?
After of course, since to do so before is using UID 0 to solve the wrong
problem and creates the removal problem.
> Any sugges
On 11-Nov-2003 Jason wrote:
> Here is the error:
>
> drm0: port 0xa000-0xa0ff mem
> 0xec02-0xec02,0xe000-0xe7ff irq 10 at device 0.0 on pci2
> info: [drm] Initialized radeon 1.9.0 20020828 on minor 0
> error: [drm:radeon_cp_init] *ERROR* radeon_cp_init called without lock held
>
Hello,
I am investigating the possiblilies for looking at the kernel boot
parameters from within a userland utility. (Possibly a new FreeBSD install
facility) The idea is that by looking at sysctl kern.environment.* you
should be able to see the BTX variables. An install program could use this
t
Hi!
Recently, I submitted PR bin/59167 and I'm interested in the
preferred way of fixing it.
Below, I duplicate the "Fix" section of submitted PR for your
convenience.
Note that the following conclusions are made after only a brief looking at
the problem code so t
On Tue, Nov 04, 2003, David Schultz wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 04, 2003, Igor Serikov wrote:
> >
> > David,
> >
> > Is it okay to have a condition that can be created by a mortal user and
> > then cannot be changed by the root? The waiting process cannot be killed
> > and would keep "waiting" till
On Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 10:31:18AM -0500, Dan Langille wrote:
> If a process starts up and does a setuid, should it be writing the
> PID file before or after the setuid?
>
> Two methods exists AFAIK:
>
> 1 - write your PID immediately, and the file is chown root:wheel
> 2 - write your PID to /va
Here is the error:
drm0: port 0xa000-0xa0ff mem
0xec02-0xec02,0xe000-0xe7ff irq 10 at device 0.0 on pci2
info: [drm] Initialized radeon 1.9.0 20020828 on minor 0
error: [drm:radeon_cp_init] *ERROR* radeon_cp_init called without lock held
error: [drm:radeon_unlock] *ERROR* Process
7 matches
Mail list logo