[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAPLrYETXrOnjVFuipJ14C4sXO344JwokqG7S_k5iB0ce-kXN+g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 09:45:40 +0200
From: Daniel Cegiełka <daniel.cegielka@...il.com>
To: owl-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: procps-3.2.8
BAD_PROCFS_MESSAGE from checkproc() is the same as BAD_OPEN_MESSAGE:
procps-3.2.5-owl-proc.diff:
-#define BAD_OPEN_MESSAGE \
-"Error: /proc must be mounted\n" \
-" To mount /proc at boot you need an /etc/fstab line like:\n" \
-" /proc /proc proc defaults\n" \
-" In the meantime, mount /proc /proc -t proc\n"
-
diff -urk.orig procps-3.2.5.orig/proc/checkproc.c procps-3.2.5/proc/checkproc.c
--- procps-3.2.5.orig/proc/checkproc.c 1970-01-01 00:00:00 +0000
+++ procps-3.2.5/proc/checkproc.c 2005-08-30 13:21:15 +0000
@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+#ifdef HAVE_CONFIG_H
(...)
+#include "checkproc.h"
+
+#define BAD_PROCFS_MESSAGE \
+"Error: /proc must be mounted\n" \
+" To mount /proc at boot you need an /etc/fstab line like:\n" \
+" proc /proc proc defaults\n" \
+" In the meantime, mount proc /proc -t proc\n"
+
+// Check whether procfs is available.
+// If yes, returns 0.
+// If not, outputs error message and exit with specified return code,
+// unless rc is zero. In later case, returns -1.
+extern int checkproc(int rc) {
+ if (access("/proc/self/stat", R_OK) == 0)
+ return 0;
+ fprintf(stderr, "%s", BAD_PROCFS_MESSAGE);
(...)
fprintf(stderr, "%s", BAD_OPEN_MESSAGE) equivalent is included in the
checkproc.c, so (procps-3.2.5-owl-proc.diff). I remove the
fprintf(stderr, "%s", BAD_OPEN_MESSAGE) code and leave only
checkproc(). This means that procps-3.2.5-owl-format.diff will also be
corrected. The current solution introduces some confusion and makes it
more difficult to analyze. Do you agree with this solution?
Daniel
2012/6/18 Daniel Cegiełka <daniel.cegielka@...il.com>:
> Hi,
>
> I try to prepare an update owl patches to procps-3.2.8., but I'm a bit
> confused. We have in procps-3.2.5-owl-proc.diff:
>
>
> diff -urk.orig procps-3.2.5.orig/proc/sysinfo.c procps-3.2.5/proc/sysinfo.c
> --- procps-3.2.5.orig/proc/sysinfo.c 2005-08-30 12:25:06 +0000
> +++ procps-3.2.5/proc/sysinfo.c 2005-08-30 13:19:36 +0000
>
> (...)
>
> @@ -52,7 +47,7 @@
> #define FILE_TO_BUF(filename, fd) do{ \
> static int local_n; \
> if (fd == -1 && (fd = open(filename, O_RDONLY)) == -1) { \
> - fprintf(stderr, "%s", BAD_OPEN_MESSAGE); \
> + checkproc(0); \
> fflush(NULL); \
> _exit(102); \
> }
>
>
> and then in procps-3.2.5-owl-format.diff:
>
> diff -urk.orig procps-3.2.5.orig/proc/sysinfo.c procps-3.2.5/proc/sysinfo.c
> --- procps-3.2.5.orig/proc/sysinfo.c 2005-08-30 13:44:12 +0000
> +++ procps-3.2.5/proc/sysinfo.c 2005-08-30 13:44:24 +0000
> @@ -52,7 +52,7 @@
> #define FILE_TO_BUF(filename, fd) do{ \
> static int local_n; \
> if (fd == -1 && (fd = open(filename, O_RDONLY)) == -1) { \
> - fprintf(stderr, BAD_OPEN_MESSAGE); \
> + fprintf(stderr, "%s", BAD_OPEN_MESSAGE); \
> fflush(NULL); \
> _exit(102); \
> }
>
>
> Should I write "fprintf(stderr, "%s", BAD_OPEN_MESSAGE);\" or
> "checkproc(0); \" or both???
>
> In a few days I will try to send a whole...
>
> Best regards,
> Daniel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
