Lately I fixed a bug that allowed macro misuse of EV_SET().
I changed the macro into a static inline function, however we can
improve it. We can cast the last parameter to intptr_t to get better
compatibility with other BSDs.
Also, just in case if someone uses "#ifdef EV_SET" in the code, we can
Thanks - it would be great to have this functionality!
On 31 May 2017 at 09:53, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> On May 31, 9:40am, a...@pkgsrc.org (Alistair Crooks) wrote:
> -- Subject: Re: static pie support for x86 (from OpenBSD)
>
> | Is there any way the _DYNAMIC entry could be abused - to provide
On May 31, 9:40am, a...@pkgsrc.org (Alistair Crooks) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: static pie support for x86 (from OpenBSD)
| Is there any way the _DYNAMIC entry could be abused - to provide hints
| on range of aslr, or to allow dynamic linking from within the static
| binary from an abused stack or si
Is there any way the _DYNAMIC entry could be abused - to provide hints
on range of aslr, or to allow dynamic linking from within the static
binary from an abused stack or similar?
On 31 May 2017 at 05:14, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> In article <20170531085212.gb22...@britannica.bec.de>,
> Joerg Sonn
In article <20170531132310.gf3...@homeworld.netbsd.org>,
Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
>Hello
>
>Binaries from src/external/bsd/dhcp cannot be easily folded into a
>crunchgen(1) binary, because libdhcp.a uses callbacks with the same
>function names for dhclient, dhcrealy, dhcpd, and omshell.
>
>The o
Hello
Binaries from src/external/bsd/dhcp cannot be easily folded into a
crunchgen(1) binary, because libdhcp.a uses callbacks with the same
function names for dhclient, dhcrealy, dhcpd, and omshell.
The offending symbols are classify, check_collection, dhcp, dhcpv6, bootp,
find_class, parse_al
In article <20170531085212.gb22...@britannica.bec.de>,
Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
>On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 05:38:33PM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
>> I ported OpenBSD's static pie support to x86. Here's what it looks like.
>> I left some debugging stuff in the csu Makefile that needs cleanup?
>>
In article <20170531075959.ga18...@mail.duskware.de>,
Martin Husemann wrote:
>On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 05:38:33PM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
>> I ported OpenBSD's static pie support to x86. Here's what it looks like.
>> I left some debugging stuff in the csu Makefile that needs cleanup?
>> Opin
On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 05:38:33PM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> I ported OpenBSD's static pie support to x86. Here's what it looks like.
> I left some debugging stuff in the csu Makefile that needs cleanup?
> Opinions? Should I add it?
I really dislike how this is implemented.
Joerg
On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 05:38:33PM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> I ported OpenBSD's static pie support to x86. Here's what it looks like.
> I left some debugging stuff in the csu Makefile that needs cleanup?
> Opinions? Should I add it?
This functionality is nice to have!
Why is the kernel chang
10 matches
Mail list logo