From owner-svn-src-head@freebsd.org Thu Jun 21 18:14:05 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-head@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCF911025A0D; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 18:14:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cse.cem@gmail.com) Received: from mail-it0-f47.google.com (mail-it0-f47.google.com [209.85.214.47]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 70C6589037; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 18:14:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cse.cem@gmail.com) Received: by mail-it0-f47.google.com with SMTP id p185-v6so6055134itp.4; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 11:14:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references :from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=M5x9gYY/J3jOKH1R5bf1gHuJ79HkFqS2LVn84D37xkg=; b=DjMJoVC7RrPDQKCzVy/TIQVTfTsZLElOaY7t2ovinShSGFiBquEbdEn3iDvjvwtKN5 xvvXCcRBUedT1KfkrGI6+SN3kB9LrWvresFbgbRhEONPcicsMhkFyhysW6sQI+kqhSE5 aXI0ZalcIfXGoacS30bG0f+zbuv812VHqt15/jUY5VEoH8mWoRHoQ04gil5NZXAPzzLO sALmjKBsoij6RsXw8Wpen+Huy8IsNAk3SC+6UMvINwyy5iQLBiffhEhv1OMQxIEO3ZSj 9viSYo+xPMr2ztomIOmXNSstpdo0InFW3EOND7Ziaj+0QARgLJC1XbeKHfHuHLHiunRd 9DrA== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E1GcZ32L/JuiV5j+0xYJVcmXkSn+M8gopWtxqkNRV7P8cdYIgFB A/Svl8C4tjOFp3GcpkyL2cy9Ije7 X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKIAmnlPY11oM0h9bO+JrqsSmzt4AS+9yzipY18kMU5AwalB/MoWVyFXTXm8KPKjOXG+gR16bQ== X-Received: by 2002:a02:8d29:: with SMTP id h38-v6mr22121825jak.30.1529604839401; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 11:13:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-it0-f47.google.com (mail-it0-f47.google.com. [209.85.214.47]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w5-v6sm793744ioc.26.2018.06.21.11.13.58 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 21 Jun 2018 11:13:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-it0-f47.google.com with SMTP id m194-v6so6014957itg.2; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 11:13:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a24:ed4a:: with SMTP id r71-v6mr6075244ith.53.1529604838787; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 11:13:58 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Reply-To: cem@freebsd.org Received: by 2002:a02:5995:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 11:13:58 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <201806200108.w5K18sIR050132@repo.freebsd.org> From: Conrad Meyer Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 11:13:58 -0700 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: svn commit: r335402 - head/sbin/veriexecctl To: Stephen Kiernan Cc: Eitan Adler , src-committers , svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-BeenThere: svn-src-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the src tree for head/-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 18:14:06 -0000 On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 9:51 AM, Stephen Kiernan wrote: > On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 10:36 PM, Eitan Adler wrote: >> >> On 19 June 2018 at 20:08, Eitan Adler wrote: >> > On 19 June 2018 at 18:08, Stephen J. Kiernan wrote: >> >> Added: head/sbin/veriexecctl/Makefile >> >> >> >> ============================================================================== >> >> --- /dev/null 00:00:00 1970 (empty, because file is newly added) >> >> +++ head/sbin/veriexecctl/Makefile Wed Jun 20 01:08:54 2018 >> >> (r335402) >> >> @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ >> >> +# $FreeBSD$ >> >> + >> >> +PROG= veriexecctl >> >> +MAN= veriexecctl.8 >> >> +SRCS= veriexecctl_parse.y veriexecctl_conf.l veriexecctl.c >> >> + >> >> +WARNS?= 3 >> > >> > Why are we introducing new code with lower-than-6 warnings ? >> >> In all the commotion about the more important issues this fell >> through. Also its argument parsing appears to not be using >> getopt[_long] ? > > > I replied to this 2 days ago with: > "veriexecctl came from NetBSD originally and that is what they had, > but I believe it should be able to be bumped up." > > However, there has been some discussion about just not putting in > veriexecctl for now and wait for some work that Simon Gerraty has been > doing, using some of the work for the verified loader, instead. However, it > would also mean that in the meantime, there would be nothing available > to be able to people to try out veriexec to provide some feedback until > that utility was completed and committed. Hi, While the code is out of HEAD, it can be posted to a github branch (or a projects/ branch if you prefer SVN) for people to try. Best regards, Conrad