From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Apr 4 18:33:46 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BD4216A400 for ; Tue, 4 Apr 2006 18:33:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scrappy@postgresql.org) Received: from hub.org (hub.org [200.46.204.220]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF80843D92 for ; Tue, 4 Apr 2006 18:33:29 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scrappy@postgresql.org) Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E04B98244F7; Tue, 4 Apr 2006 14:58:34 -0300 (ADT) Received: from hub.org ([200.46.204.220]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 21864-07; Tue, 4 Apr 2006 14:58:02 -0300 (ADT) Received: from ganymede.hub.org (blk-222-82-85.eastlink.ca [24.222.82.85]) by hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0495823BAD; Tue, 4 Apr 2006 14:35:52 -0300 (ADT) Received: by ganymede.hub.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 8D9BC3D91B; Tue, 4 Apr 2006 14:35:59 -0300 (ADT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ganymede.hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C8783D7EB; Tue, 4 Apr 2006 14:35:59 -0300 (ADT) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 14:35:59 -0300 (ADT) From: "Marc G. Fournier" X-X-Sender: scrappy@ganymede.hub.org To: Peter Jeremy In-Reply-To: <20060404093058.GF683@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org> Message-ID: <20060404143441.C947@ganymede.hub.org> References: <20060403140902.C947@ganymede.hub.org> <20060403182504.S76562@fledge.watson.org> <20060403144916.J947@ganymede.hub.org> <20060404093058.GF683@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org Cc: "Marc G. Fournier" , freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [HACKERS] semaphore usage "port based"? X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 18:33:46 -0000 On Tue, 4 Apr 2006, Peter Jeremy wrote: > On Mon, 2006-Apr-03 14:55:10 -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote: >> That is all I'm advocatin / asking for ... some way of reverting kill(PID, >> 0) back to the old, FreeBSD 4.x behaviour, where this works beautifully :( >> At least until someone does get around to 'virtualization of SysV IPC' :( > > There's the old standby: You have the source code. > > You should be able to get things to work by expanding prison_check() > into cr_cansignal() and changing the error return from ESRCH to EPERM. > Having not tried this, I can't comment on possible adverse side-effects. that's why I'm hoping for a more 'wide spread' fix ... right now, I have a work around for the problem, and the thread that has been going on concerning how 'per jail' IPC could be implemented looks very promising ... ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664