This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH 1/5] __fdelt_chk: Removed range check
- From: Andreas Jaeger <aj at suse dot com>
- To: libc-alpha at sourceware dot org
- Date: Fri, 03 May 2013 15:35:47 +0200
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] __fdelt_chk: Removed range check
- References: <1365900451-19026-1-git-send-email-kosaki dot motohiro at gmail dot com> <1365900451-19026-2-git-send-email-kosaki dot motohiro at gmail dot com> <51807D13 dot 9090706 at redhat dot com> <CAHGf_=oBg-XJ3RmqF_Ox7a3-UWpc0Gg+6LhVfm-sx0PLwjyLXQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <51812A69 dot 6000004 at redhat dot com> <51819377 dot 3040403 at gmail dot com> <5183265B dot 8090604 at redhat dot com>
On 05/03/2013 04:52 AM, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> [...]
1) If not disabling, Ubuntu/OpenSUSE need to recompile ALL of affected
>packages. Do you suggest to recompile all of them?
No. They need only recompile those applications that don't
conform to POSIX and expect a Linux-style select with support for
fds > 1024. Once recompiled we rely on __bos0 to make the
check dynamic, if it doesn't, then the package will need to disable
the check with a special fortify source flag.
At the end of the day the community has worked hard to enable
_FORTIFY_SOURCE. The distributions made a*conscious* choice to
turn on these checks. We are doing them a disservice if we disable
the checks in glibc because applications are having problems.
It was the distribution's choice to enable the check. The package
maintainers need to work with the distribution and glibc to understand
the issues and fix their code. Nothing is fixed by Ruby calling
glibc "wrong" e.g. "the implementation is wrong... it wrongly assume
fd is always less than FD_SETSIZE (i.e. 1024)...". It's not wrong,
it's POSIX;-)
>Dear Ubuntu and OpenSUSE guys, please tell me your opinion. This patch
>doesn't affect Fedora/RHEL/Debian. So I want to know which is close to
>your desire.
Added Andreas and Adam to the TO.
For openSUSE, we would only update glibc for a new release - and
recompile all packages against this new glibc anyway. So, we should be fine.
But this would also affect third-party binary packages that are outside
of the distribution - and this might be packages that are used on a
variety of distributions.
Andreas
--
Andreas Jaeger aj@{suse.com,opensuse.org} Twitter/Identica: jaegerandi
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
GF: Jeff Hawn,Jennifer Guild,Felix Imendörffer,HRB16746 (AG Nürnberg)
GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126