From owner-freebsd-security@freebsd.org  Fri Oct 30 10:18:19 2015
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-security@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: freebsd-security@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95155A207DD
 for <freebsd-security@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>;
 Fri, 30 Oct 2015 10:18:19 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from herbert@oslo.ath.cx)
Received: from oslo.ath.cx (oslo.ath.cx [144.76.166.229])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5BD7F1934
 for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 10:18:19 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from herbert@oslo.ath.cx)
Received: from oslo.ath.cx (localhost [IPv6:::1])
 by oslo.ath.cx (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EECF142A;
 Fri, 30 Oct 2015 11:18:11 +0100 (CET)
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2015 11:18:11 +0100
From: "Herbert J. Skuhra" <herbert@oslo.ath.cx>
To: Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sm=F8rgrav?= <des@des.no>
Cc: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Compilation problem since SA-15:25 for FreeBSD 10.2-RELEASE
Message-ID: <20151030101811.GA27206@oslo.ath.cx>
References: <4D69BAFF-7447-4A1F-ABB8-686CA34090F3@iaelu.net>
 <20151027114642.GA7848@oslo.ath.cx>
 <4043BA45-F5A5-4218-93F2-C320DE65EB6D@iaelu.net>
 <20151027125913.GB7848@oslo.ath.cx>
 <20151027150144.GD7848@oslo.ath.cx>
 <AA734831-0FE8-4E8B-BEED-64B9D020C201@iaelu.net>
 <86wpu4bw7w.fsf@desk.des.no>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <86wpu4bw7w.fsf@desk.des.no>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24+24 (41af5a753d6f) (2015-08-30)
X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Security issues \[members-only posting\]"
 <freebsd-security.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-security>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-security/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-security@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2015 10:18:19 -0000

On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 09:24:03AM +0100, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
> Guillaume Bibaut <freebsd-security@iaelu.net> writes:
> > Herbert J. Skuhra <herbert@oslo.ath.cx> writes:
> > > OK, with 'patch -p0 < /path/to/ntp-102.patch' I get only [...]
> > As far as I know, the SA does not mention 'patch -p0'. Shouldn’t this
> > be mentioned?
> 
> BSD patch(1) assumes -p0.  GNU patch(1) does not.  I assume Herbert is
> used to GNU patch(1) and used -p0 out of habit.  It is harmless, but not
> necessary.

I simply tried '-p0' because the instructions in the SA didn't work at
all! With '-p0' I end up with a src tree that builds at least (only a
few man pages failed to patch). Tested on stable/10 and head.

% fetch ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/releases/amd64/amd64/10.2-RELEASE/src.txz
% fetch https://security.FreeBSD.org/patches/SA-15:25/ntp-102.patch.bz2
% tar xfJ src.txz
% bunzip2 ntp-102.patch.bz2
% cd usr/src

Apply the patches from the other SAs (doesn't make any difference). They
apply cleanly.

% patch < ../../ntp-102.patch

A lot of *.c, *.h and *.orig files are created in the wrong place!

So can anyone confirm that the ntp patches in the SA are correct and we
are just too stupid to use patch?

Thanks.

-- 
Herbert