On Sun, 28 Apr 2019 at 02:43, Thomas Frohwein wrote:
>
> On Sun, Apr 28, 2019 at 02:07:44AM +0700, Igor Podlesny wrote:
> [...]
> > Looks like decision made aren't subjects of discussing(?) Well, why
> > the hell you have those mail lists then(?) :)
>
> Igor:
> The actual purpose of misc@ is for u
On 12:43 Sat 27 Apr, Thomas Frohwein wrote:
> Move along, nothing to see here.
I want to see more butthurting Theo!
Otto Moerbeek writes:
>
> The mechanism is in the docs as well, not only in the code. You
You are of course correct, and OpenBSD has some of the best documentation
I've ever seen, but I've spent so long in linux land that whenever I'm
met with the question of how *exactly* something works, I just
On Sun, Apr 28, 2019 at 02:07:44AM +0700, Igor Podlesny wrote:
[...]
> Looks like decision made aren't subjects of discussing(?) Well, why
> the hell you have those mail lists then(?) :)
Igor:
The actual purpose of misc@ is for us to learn that you are among the people to
ignore.
Everyone else:
M
Igor Podlesny writes:
> On Sun, 28 Apr 2019 at 00:59, wrote:
> [...]
> > >
> > > Oh, those hypocrite wankers here and there..
> >
> > If you actually read the code (I know, right? Who DOES that?) you'll see
> > how omalloc_
> init perfectly embarrasses you. In 6.4 it would read the symlink, then
On Sun, Apr 28, 2019 at 02:07:44AM +0700, Igor Podlesny wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Apr 2019 at 00:59, wrote:
> [...]
> > >
> > > Oh, those hypocrite wankers here and there..
> >
> > If you actually read the code (I know, right? Who DOES that?) you'll see
> > how omalloc_init perfectly embarrasses you.
On Sun, 28 Apr 2019 at 00:59, wrote:
[...]
> >
> > Oh, those hypocrite wankers here and there..
>
> If you actually read the code (I know, right? Who DOES that?) you'll see how
> omalloc_init perfectly embarrasses you. In 6.4 it would read the symlink,
> then checked the environment, and then co
Igor Podlesny writes:
> On Sat, 27 Apr 2019 at 18:09, Marc Espie wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 12:34:01PM +0700, Igor Podlesny wrote:
> > > On Sat, 27 Apr 2019 at 12:26, Sebastien Marie wrote:
> > > > On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 12:17:21PM +0700, Igor Podlesny wrote:
> > > > > Previously use
On Sat, 27 Apr 2019 at 20:38, Vincent Legoll wrote:
>
> On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 3:32 PM Igor Podlesny wrote:
> > On Sat, 27 Apr 2019 at 18:09, Marc Espie wrote:
> > > Man, you have some really strange delusions about how to harden things.
> >
> > % man malloc.conf | grep -i security
> > S
On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 3:32 PM Igor Podlesny wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Apr 2019 at 18:09, Marc Espie wrote:
> > Man, you have some really strange delusions about how to harden things.
>
> % man malloc.conf | grep -i security
> S Enable all options suitable for security auditing.
>
> Oh, th
On Sat, 27 Apr 2019 at 18:09, Marc Espie wrote:
>
> On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 12:34:01PM +0700, Igor Podlesny wrote:
> > On Sat, 27 Apr 2019 at 12:26, Sebastien Marie wrote:
> > > On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 12:17:21PM +0700, Igor Podlesny wrote:
> > > > Previously users could have different behaviour
On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 12:34:01PM +0700, Igor Podlesny wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Apr 2019 at 12:26, Sebastien Marie wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 12:17:21PM +0700, Igor Podlesny wrote:
> > > Previously users could have different behaviour of malloc simultaneously:
> > > one in
> > > global FS, ot
On 4/27/19 8:23 AM, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> Additionally, in many cases using a symlink has unclear effects, since
> it is hard to determine if the first malloc call (malloc inits itself
> on first use) happens before of after the chroot call. I would argue
> that in many cases people were thinking
I like reading misc@ mostly due to the constanst BUTTHURT that is going
on here.
But seriously though, each program can change it's own malloc flags
either by calling setenv(3) or just by updating static malloc_options
variable. So there is really *NO* difference between your old way
(/etc/malloc.
On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 11:46:17PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> Igor Podlesny wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 27 Apr 2019 at 12:37, Anthony J. Bentley wrote:
> > >
> > > You didn't check the manpage.
> >
> > you didn't think it over.
> > https://www.mail-archive.com/misc@openbsd.org/msg167012.html
>
>
On Sat, 27 Apr 2019 at 12:55, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> Igor Podlesny wrote:
> > On Sat, 27 Apr 2019 at 12:37, Anthony J. Bentley wrote:
> > > You didn't check the manpage.
> >
> > you didn't think it over.
> > https://www.mail-archive.com/misc@openbsd.org/msg167012.html
>
> Igor, talking back to t
> > Wrong. Environment is easy to be changed by any non-privileged process.
> > OTOH, root owned /etc/malloc.conf is not.
>
> Back then, when both /etc/malloc.conf and MALLOC_OPTIONS were set, which
> did a program prefer?
I'm more concerned with cleared up environment other than changed
MALLOC_OP
Igor Podlesny wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Apr 2019 at 12:37, Anthony J. Bentley wrote:
> >
> > You didn't check the manpage.
>
> you didn't think it over.
> https://www.mail-archive.com/misc@openbsd.org/msg167012.html
Igor, talking back to the developers of the operating system you use is
never a good
On Sat, 27 Apr 2019 at 12:46, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> Igor Podlesny wrote:
> > On Sat, 27 Apr 2019 at 12:37, Anthony J. Bentley wrote:
> > > You didn't check the manpage.
> > you didn't think it over.
> > https://www.mail-archive.com/misc@openbsd.org/msg167012.html
>
> No, you didn't think it thr
Igor Podlesny wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Apr 2019 at 12:37, Anthony J. Bentley wrote:
> >
> > You didn't check the manpage.
>
> you didn't think it over.
> https://www.mail-archive.com/misc@openbsd.org/msg167012.html
No, you didn't think it through at all.
You are expecting the malloc settings to pr
Igor Podlesny writes:
> On Sat, 27 Apr 2019 at 12:26, Sebastien Marie wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 12:17:21PM +0700, Igor Podlesny wrote:
> > > Previously users could have different behaviour of malloc simultaneously:
> one in
> > > global FS, others in chroots. Say, in global it could be m
On Sat, 27 Apr 2019 at 12:37, Anthony J. Bentley wrote:
>
> You didn't check the manpage.
you didn't think it over.
https://www.mail-archive.com/misc@openbsd.org/msg167012.html
--
End of message. Next message?
Igor Podlesny writes:
> Previously users could have different behaviour of malloc simultaneously: one
> in
> global FS, others in chroots. Say, in global it could be more relaxed
> with lesser
> performance impact and in some chroots more drastic, at contrary. With
> 6.5 it's not
> possible anymor
On Sat, 27 Apr 2019 at 12:26, Sebastien Marie wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 12:17:21PM +0700, Igor Podlesny wrote:
> > Previously users could have different behaviour of malloc simultaneously:
> > one in
> > global FS, others in chroots. Say, in global it could be more relaxed
[...]
> malloc(3
On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 12:17:21PM +0700, Igor Podlesny wrote:
> Previously users could have different behaviour of malloc simultaneously: one
> in
> global FS, others in chroots. Say, in global it could be more relaxed
> with lesser
> performance impact and in some chroots more drastic, at contra
25 matches
Mail list logo
