On Thu February 2 2006 21:55, Herbert Poetzl wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 02, 2006 at 08:08:38PM -0600, Michael S. Zick wrote:
> > On Thu February 2 2006 19:32, Herbert Poetzl wrote:
> > > On Thu, Feb 02, 2006 at 04:33:16PM -0600, Michael S. Zick wrote:
> > > > On Thu February 2 2006 14:09, Herbert Poetzl wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, Feb 02, 2006 at 02:29:38PM -0500, Micah Anderson wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > really depends on the dietlibc, but I'd assume it
> > > > > > > is _still_ broken on HPPA, nevertheless the glibc
> > > > > > > is _not_ a good alternative, although it _might_
> > > > > > > work for simple things.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I guess we can find out when Joel sends results of tests?
> > > > >
> > > > > possible, well, testme and testfs will not
> > > > > detect the insecurities introduced by glibc
> > > > >
> > > > Are there any tests available to check for these glibc problems?
> > >
> > > I don't know of explicit tests, but it should be
> > > possible to create some, given that somebody wants
> > > to spend time on it ...
> > >
> > > > If not, perhaps a pointer or two into the mail archives on
> > > > the subject or pointer(s) to a discussion of the problems found?
> > >
> > > http://list.linux-vserver.org/archive/vserver/msg09379.html
> > > (there are others, just goolge for it)
>
> > Thanks, now I read what the concerns are. . .
> >
> > That message is about the date of glibc-2.3.2 - current is 2.3.6
> >
> > There has been a fair number of changes done between those versions.
> > Some affecting getpwnam() and friends when used in staticly linked
> > programs.
>
> well, please also check how 'small' the statically
> linked tools would be when linked against recent glibc
> (statically of course :)
>
That I can do - Just need to look up the information on build machine.
This is off topic for the subject - so will break this thread.
> > I think both of the mentioned restrictions can now be enforced.
>
> would be good as a last resort when dietlibc is failing
> (as it is currently the case for parisc)
>
> > Let me spend some time on checking that statement before I go too
> > far out on a limb.
>
> please do so, and keep us posted ...
>
Next update will be a thread tagged: [glibc] for future m-l reference.
Mike
_______________________________________________
Vserver mailing list
Vserver@list.linux-vserver.org
http://list.linux-vserver.org/mailman/listinfo/vserver
Received on Fri Feb 3 13:00:01 2006