I don't think there is a word for "chroot back". Once you limit yourself
into a chroot, you are stuck in it and get special treatment until you
exit. Apart from why mknod wants to fail inside chroots, having a simple
syscall being able to take you out of it would defeat the whole purpose, no?
20
The description of EINVAL in mknod(2) is wrong:
[EINVAL] The process is running within an alternate root
directory, as created by chroot(2).
Even if a process chroot()s back to /, it can't create a device node.
The program below exits with EINVAL:
#include
On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 8:51 PM, JB M wrote:
> I'm having troubles installing OpenBSD 5.5 (amd64) on a mSATA SSD card (
> http://pcengines.ch/msata16a.htm) PC Engines APU.1C device (
> http://pcengines.ch/apu.htm) with the most recent BIOS version.
>
> I've made several attempts, using install55.f
On 2014-06-07, Maxime Villard wrote:
> What gives LibreSSL more credibility? There's almost nothing new or
> innovative in it; it's just a cleaned up copy of OpenSSL. There might
> be some changes in the future, but you can be sure that LibreSSL will
> lag behind OpenSSL - and most of the code wil
# dmesg
console is /virtual-devices@100/console@1
Copyright (c) 1982, 1986, 1989, 1991, 1993
The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved.
Copyright (c) 1995-2014 OpenBSD. All rights reserved.
http://www.OpenBSD.org
OpenBSD 5.5 (GENERIC.MP) #173: Tue Mar 4 14:47:47 MS
On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 3:12 PM, Miod Vallat wrote:
>> >> Is this some kind of security protection ?
>> >
>> > of course... see mknod(2).
>>
>> i read it and still does not understand.
>
> Check the description of EINVAL.
i was reading the (8) man pages :-(
So DESTDIR is nor working and make rel
On 2014-06-07 12:51, JB M wrote:
I'm having troubles installing OpenBSD 5.5 (amd64) on a mSATA SSD card
(
http://pcengines.ch/msata16a.htm) PC Engines APU.1C device (
http://pcengines.ch/apu.htm) with the most recent BIOS version.
I've made several attempts, using install55.fs copied to an SD c
> >> Is this some kind of security protection ?
> >
> > of course... see mknod(2).
>
> i read it and still does not understand.
Check the description of EINVAL.
I'm having troubles installing OpenBSD 5.5 (amd64) on a mSATA SSD card (
http://pcengines.ch/msata16a.htm) PC Engines APU.1C device (
http://pcengines.ch/apu.htm) with the most recent BIOS version.
I've made several attempts, using install55.fs copied to an SD card, with
both 5.5-release and 5.5-c
On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 1:41 PM, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 07, 2014 at 01:30:01PM -0400, sven falempin wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 12:38 PM, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
>> > On Sat, Jun 07, 2014 at 12:28:28PM -0400, sven falempin wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 12:14 PM, sven fal
previously on this list Giancarlo Razzolini contributed:
> > What gives LibreSSL more credibility? There's almost nothing new or
> > innovative in it; it's just a cleaned up copy of OpenSSL.
> You should do your homework.
Too right, also those previous two lines showed he has no clue about
real
On Sat, Jun 07, 2014 at 01:30:01PM -0400, sven falempin wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 12:38 PM, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 07, 2014 at 12:28:28PM -0400, sven falempin wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 12:14 PM, sven falempin
> >> wrote:
> >> > On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 11:30 AM, O
On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 12:38 PM, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 07, 2014 at 12:28:28PM -0400, sven falempin wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 12:14 PM, sven falempin
>> wrote:
>> > On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 11:30 AM, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
>> >> On Sat, Jun 07, 2014 at 08:20:00AM -0400, sven fa
On Sat, Jun 07, 2014 at 12:28:28PM -0400, sven falempin wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 12:14 PM, sven falempin
> wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 11:30 AM, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> >> On Sat, Jun 07, 2014 at 08:20:00AM -0400, sven falempin wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 6:58 AM, Stuar
On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 12:14 PM, sven falempin wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 11:30 AM, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
>> On Sat, Jun 07, 2014 at 08:20:00AM -0400, sven falempin wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 6:58 AM, Stuart Henderson
>>> wrote:
>>> > On 2014-06-06, sven falempin wrote:
>>> >> De
On Sat, Jun 07, 2014 at 12:14:55PM -0400, sven falempin wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 11:30 AM, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 07, 2014 at 08:20:00AM -0400, sven falempin wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 6:58 AM, Stuart Henderson
> >> wrote:
> >> > On 2014-06-06, sven falempin wr
On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 11:30 AM, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 07, 2014 at 08:20:00AM -0400, sven falempin wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 6:58 AM, Stuart Henderson
>> wrote:
>> > On 2014-06-06, sven falempin wrote:
>> >> Dear misc readers,
>> >>
>> >> I try to understand why MAKEDEV is
On Sat, Jun 07, 2014 at 08:20:00AM -0400, sven falempin wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 6:58 AM, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> > On 2014-06-06, sven falempin wrote:
> >> Dear misc readers,
> >>
> >> I try to understand why MAKEDEV is failing inside my chroot, while i
> >> can manually create some de
On 06/06/2014 10:04 PM, Solar Designer wrote:
> OpenBSD having declined to use the tool shouldn't be interpreted e.g. by
> OpenSSL as a reason not to notify LibreSSL directly.
It seems worth noting that OpenBSD 5.5, the current release that many
people are running, incorporates OpenSSL, not Libre
Em 07-06-2014 03:38, Maxime Villard escreveu:
> But the devs preferred to fork and now blame people. So, no, I don't
> think LibreSSL will prevail, simply because it has - and will have -
> nothing new and because it has no credibility.
You should really take a look at the source code. If you're si
On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 6:58 AM, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2014-06-06, sven falempin wrote:
>> Dear misc readers,
>>
>> I try to understand why MAKEDEV is failing inside my chroot, while i
>> can manually create some dev with mknod .
>>
>> Like:
>> SCRIPT ${DESTDIR}/dev/MAKEDEV
On 07 Jun 2014, at 08:38, Maxime Villard wrote:
> Contributing code upstream would have been a way more productive
> approach;
It's already been stated that working with upstream is out of
the question for at least the following reasons:
* Bugs linger unattended for years.
* The code style is
On 2014-06-06, sven falempin wrote:
> Dear misc readers,
>
> I try to understand why MAKEDEV is failing inside my chroot, while i
> can manually create some dev with mknod .
>
> Like:
> SCRIPT ${DESTDIR}/dev/MAKEDEV dev/MAKEDEV
> SPECIAL cd dev; sh MAKEDEV ramdisk
> sh: [1]: mkno
On Sat, Jun 07, 2014 at 09:13:36AM +0200, Francois Ambrosini wrote:
> On Sat, 7 Jun 2014 07:04:47 +0400
> Solar Designer wrote:
>
> > Being on the distros list is not mandatory to receive advance
> > notification of security issues. The list is just a tool. People
> > reporting security issues
Le 07/06/2014 05:41, Eric Furman a écrit :
>
> On Fri, Jun 6, 2014, at 07:28 AM, Maxime Villard wrote:
>> Le 06/06/2014 12:47, Eric Furman a écrit :
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 6, 2014, at 04:20 AM, Renaud Allard wrote:
On 06/06/2014 05:18 AM, Eric Furman wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 5, 2014, at 08:36 PM
On Sat, 7 Jun 2014 07:04:47 +0400
Solar Designer wrote:
> To clarify and for the record:
>
> Being on the distros list is not mandatory to receive advance
> notification of security issues. The list is just a tool. People
> reporting security issues to the distros list are encouraged to also
>
26 matches
Mail list logo
