From owner-freebsd-current Wed Mar 13 3:42:54 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from relay1.macomnet.ru (relay1.macomnet.ru [195.128.64.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A736C37B400; Wed, 13 Mar 2002 03:42:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from news1.macomnet.ru (news1.macomnet.ru [195.128.64.14]) by relay1.macomnet.ru (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g2DBgkQ8461705; Wed, 13 Mar 2002 14:42:46 +0300 (MSK) Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 14:42:46 +0300 (MSK) From: Maxim Konovalov To: Kris Kennaway Cc: Robert Watson , Subject: Re: eaccess(2) breaks execution of 4.x binaries on 5.x In-Reply-To: <20020313033840.A89976@xor.obsecurity.org> Message-ID: <20020313144234.T90217-100000@news1.macomnet.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG 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