[PATCH]FSInfo Validation in mountmsdosfs()

Hi all, In -current and -stable, mountmsdosfs() doesn't not check if pm_nxtfree exceeds the max cluster in the file system. So if a corrupted msdos filesystem(which is not uncommon) is written, the following code in updatefats()@msdosfs_fat.c will generate an unpleasure panic. :) u_long

Re: [PATCH] Limited BPF to the specified program

Alexander Langer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The options should be a sysctl, since dhclient might move from inode to > inode and I don't want to recompile a kernel everytime. Had to wait till I figure out how to add a new sysctl. :-) > Also, that should be a list of filesystem:inode pairs, i

[PATCH] Limited BPF to specified program

its of BPF_ALLOWED_DEVID is the minor number of the device, while the 8~15 bits is the major number of the device. Probably I should make the options like BPF_ALLOWED_DEV_MAJOR and BPF_ALLOWED_DEV_MINOR. Anyone interested? Best wishes, Jiangyi Liu

How to recompile kernel after minor changes?

Hi all, After just changing a little in sys/kern/kern_sig.c, how can I rebuild the kernel fast? I think it should not take such a long time as 'make buildkernel' does. Anyway, just kern_sig.c need to be recompiled and the kernel can be linked. So how do you guys do in such case? Cheer

Re: idea

I'm afraid. Jiangyi Liu To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message

Re: FIX needed. Was: Weird PT_DETACH

s, trap to debugger so breakpoints * can be set before the program executes. */ STOPEVENT(p, S_EXEC, 0); if (p->p_flag & P_TRACED) psignal(p, SIGTRAP); > Attached is a simple program i used for tests. > Note that Jiangyi

Re: Weird PT_DETACH

())) { > /* child */ > ptrace(PT_TRACE_ME, 0, 0, 0); > puts("child speaking"); > execve("./test", NULL, NULL);<-- ?? > } else { > wait(0); > ptrace(PT_DETACH, pid, (caddr

RE: Weird PT_DETACH

m: "diman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: "Jiangyi Liu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2001 8:54 PMSubject: Re: Weird PT_DETACH> > > To attach debugger to a process please use PT_ATTACH> request instead of PT_DETACH. Use PT_DETACH to stop> debugging a process and leave it alone.>

Weird PT_DETACH

Hi all, The ptrace(2) man page is probably outdated. I used PT_DETACH in the following code, but it didn't run ./test. I also tried to use ptrace(PT_DETACH, pid, (caddr_t)1, 0) to detach, but it failed too. BTW, if I omit wait(0) and ptrace(PT_DETACH, ...) in the code, after it runs there is a p