Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 14:42:46 +0300 (MSK) From: Maxim Konovalov <maxim@macomnet.ru> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Cc: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.ORG>, <current@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: eaccess(2) breaks execution of 4.x binaries on 5.x Message-ID: <20020313144234.T90217-100000@news1.macomnet.ru> In-Reply-To: <20020313033840.A89976@xor.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 03:38-0800, Mar 13, 2002, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Wed, Mar 13, 2002 at 01:24:36PM +0300, Maxim Konovalov wrote: > > On 02:00-0800, Mar 13, 2002, Kris Kennaway wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Mar 13, 2002 at 08:15:30AM +0300, Maxim Konovalov wrote: > > > > > > > I can replace my eaccess(2) patch for test(1) by a workaround I am > > > > planning to commit to -stable. Is it desirable solution? > > > > > > Well, this won't solve my problem since I'm trying to run the 5.x > > > > Maybe I was unclear but it will solve your problem. My proposal is: > > > > - back test/test.c rev. 1.43 out, > > - commit a workaround I sent in previous latter to -current. > > Well, eaccess(2) is presumably a good idea, so it would be better to > just MFC it :) Agree. > Kris > -- Maxim Konovalov, MAcomnet, Internet-Intranet Dept., system engineer phone: +7 (095) 796-9079, mailto:maxim@macomnet.ru To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020313144234.T90217-100000>