Stijn Tintel writes:
> I suspect some people might counter this by saying lldpd belongs in the
> packages feed; I strongly disagree as imo LLDP is an essential service
> for any network device, and especially switches. Even the cheapest
> managed switches support LLDP for more than 5 years alread
Having libcap in OpenWrt base allows us to enable libcap support in
other packages in base.
In lldpd, this would allow the monitor process to drop its privileges
instead of running as root, improving security. It will also allow us to
drop our patch to disable libcap.
Signed-off-by: Stijn Tintel
Now that libcap is in OpenWrt base, we can drop our custom patch to
disable libcap support and have lldpd depend on it instead. This will
allow the monitor process to drop its privileges instead of running as
root, improving security.
Signed-off-by: Stijn Tintel
---
package/network/services/lldp
Signed-off-by: Stijn Tintel
---
package/libs/libcap/Makefile | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/package/libs/libcap/Makefile b/package/libs/libcap/Makefile
index 29ff75c5cd..b8e45a52c7 100644
--- a/package/libs/libcap/Makefile
+++ b/package/libs/libcap/Makefil
Signed-off-by: Stijn Tintel
---
package/libs/libcap/Makefile | 2 --
1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/package/libs/libcap/Makefile b/package/libs/libcap/Makefile
index 0206bd9d1d..29ff75c5cd 100644
--- a/package/libs/libcap/Makefile
+++ b/package/libs/libcap/Makefile
@@ -1,6 +1,4 @@
Having libcap in OpenWrt base allows us to enable libcap support in
other packages in base.
In lldpd, this would allow the monitor process to drop its privileges
instead of running as root, improving security. It will also allow us to
drop our patch to disable libcap.
I suspect some people might
On 11/03/2021 14:35, Bjørn Mork wrote:
> Demote a number of debugging printk's to pr_debug to avoid log
> nosie. Several of these functions are called as a result of
> userspace activity. This can cause a lot of log noise when
> userspace does periodic polling.
>
> Most of this could probably be
The library is always compiled with $(FPIC) (-fPIC or -fpic), even for
the static library.
There are some assembly sources that decide whether or not to enable
PIC code by checking if PIC is defined. It counts on libtool to define
it, but libtool does it only when producing code for the dynamic
l
Petr Štetiar writes:
Dear Maintainers,
> Unless there is a good reason to have this enabled, it should stay
> disabled in official builds and "but Debian has it enabled" is not
> valid argument either.
Now that it's being decided that macro
CONFIG_DEVMEM shall not be enabled by default, why can
Petr Štetiar writes:
Dear Maintainers,
> Unless there is a good reason to have this enabled, it should stay
> disabled in official builds and "but Debian has it enabled" is not
> valid argument either.
Now that it's being decided that macro
CONFIG_DEVMEM shall not be enabled by default, why can
or uclient-fetch will stall until timeout for 2XX (except 204) response
with content-length of 0
Signed-off-by: Youfu Zhang
---
uclient-http.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/uclient-http.c b/uclient-http.c
index 349e69c..c2bba6b 100644
--- a/uclient-http.c
Hello Hans,
I have had the problem for a long time that I see the following message
in the syslog.
Tue Apr 2 10:50:23 2019 daemon.notice netifd: wwan (11146): Command
failed: Permission denied
This message in the syslog is written when the interface makes a
teardown after a misconfigurati
Demote a number of debugging printk's to pr_debug to avoid log
nosie. Several of these functions are called as a result of
userspace activity. This can cause a lot of log noise when
userspace does periodic polling.
Most of this could probably be removed completely, but let's
keep it for now sinc
Working brilliantly for weeks here as well.
Tested-by: Stijn Segers
___
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Hi, guys!
On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 at 09:25, wrote:
>
> The issue with limits.h was exactly one of those intermittent,
> hard-to-reproduce problems recently reported (by Rui Salvaterra), with
> similar patches being shared. As in your case, having builds by buildbots and
> others routinely succeed
Hello Andre
We already talked about it, but once again for the list:
Here are my thoughts on why I would like to have this for the
mailinglist.
I skipped both of these numeric state values when porting this to
ubus/C, because those are internal and lantiq implementation specific.
I'd like
16 matches
Mail list logo