From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 9 00:47:37 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AE2216A407 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2007 00:47:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from swhetzel@gmail.com) Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com (nf-out-0910.google.com [64.233.182.189]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEB2B13C474 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2007 00:47:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from swhetzel@gmail.com) Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id m19so935925nfc for ; Thu, 08 Feb 2007 16:47:35 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; b=dVh4oNQefcjSzc0TJ79LS1jIgvrVfYhVR1c/Cx+lYJhcKtl4No+K7vpyDz5TVF1kIYjo7bhboqAV7v/aBfmnO/Y1Uxh4kqZqBkD34WlPx7LBCjMy9+COEfBBX/zk/hFf7+Wc8v0YcStr5VZx06vt0ayD7yJfW64Cc+B8cphVWe8= Received: by 10.82.153.5 with SMTP id a5mr4278320bue.1170982055283; Thu, 08 Feb 2007 16:47:35 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.82.186.2 with HTTP; Thu, 8 Feb 2007 16:47:35 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <790a9fff0702081647p6c9987acpdcfe7b5879521984@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 18:47:35 -0600 From: "Scot Hetzel" To: "Kirk Strauser" , freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Cc: Subject: Re: Weird perms with linux_base-gentoo-stage3 X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 00:47:37 -0000 > and it seems that the problem is trigged by the utimes() syscall. Has anyone > found a workaround to this problem? It doesn't look like it's been patched > in FreeBSD itself yet, and I haven't gotten a reply from the author of the > above post when I asked him if he'd solved the problem. Neither was I able > to find the patch he mention. > > Any pointers would be most appreciated! The utimes() syscall has been implement, and it was added to -CURRENT on 12/31/06. The below patches from current implement the utimes() syscall, as well as the rt_sigtimedwait() syscall. http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/sys/amd64/linux32/linux32_dummy.c.diff?r1=1.6&r2=1.7 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/sys/amd64/linux32/linux32_proto.h.diff?r1=1.27&r2=1.28 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/sys/amd64/linux32/linux32_syscall.h.diff?r1=1.27&r2=1.28 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/sys/amd64/linux32/linux32_sysent.c.diff?r1=1.27&r2=1.28 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/sys/amd64/linux32/syscalls.master.diff?r1=1.24&r2=1.25 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/sys/compat/linux/linux_misc.c.diff?r1=1.201&r2=1.202 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/sys/compat/linux/linux_signal.c.diff?r1=1.61&r2=1.63http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/sys/i386/linux/linux_dummy.c.diff?r1=1.44&r2=1.45 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/sys/i386/linux/linux_proto.h.diff?r1=1.89&r2=1.90 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/sys/i386/linux/linux_syscall.h.diff?r1=1.82&r2=1.83 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/sys/i386/linux/linux_sysent.c.diff?r1=1.89&r2=1.90 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/sys/i386/linux/syscalls.master.diff?r1=1.84&r2=1.85 Scot -- DISCLAIMER: No electrons were mamed while sending this message. Only slightly bruised.