Previously Joey Hess wrote:
> if (lstat(pathname,&stab)) return -1;
> if (S_ISREG(stab.st_mode) ? (stab.st_mode | 07000) :
> !(S_ISLNK(stab.st_mode) || S_ISDIR(stab.st_mode) ||
>S_ISFIFO(stab.st_mode) || S_ISSOCK(stab.st_mode))) {
You found a nice little bug in there: (stab.st_mode |
On Sat, Sep 25, 1999 at 03:00:35AM -0700, Joey Hess wrote:
> Darren/Torin/Who Ever... wrote:
> > I inherited this when I inherited the package in November of 1995. It
> > was setup this way so that after the removal of the previous Perl
> > package and before the installation of a new Perl package
On Sat, Sep 25, 1999 at 02:42:28AM -0700, Darren/Torin/Who Ever... wrote:
> I notice that bash doesn't do any shenanigans like this. Is this a
> relic of bygone days and I don't need to do this funky stuff anymore?
> That would make things much easier for me.
Nothing to do but test :)
Ben
Darren/Torin/Who Ever... wrote:
> I inherited this when I inherited the package in November of 1995. It
> was setup this way so that after the removal of the previous Perl
> package and before the installation of a new Perl package, there was
> still a Perl available. Since we always needed a Per
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Ben Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, in an immanent manifestation of deity, wrote:
>More specifically it is dpkg doing the breaking, but it's perl's fault on
>how it is setting everything up.
>
>You will note that these two binaries are in the perl package itself
>
>
Ben Collins wrote:
> Now when dpkg first unpacks a package, it replaces binaries by first,
> chmod 600 on the binary (I'm not sure why, but it does), then unlinking
> it.
The reason why dpkg does this is because of a neat little hard link exploit.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/tmp>ln /usr/gamesxthrust
[EMAI
Hi,
On 24 Sep 1999, David Coe wrote:
> Looking at libc6.postinst I see that it runs (at least) two
> perl scripts: update-rc.d and suidregister. I believe it was
> update-rc.d that failed, but I can't be positive.
That is a correct observation. Fix:
# chmod 755 /usr/bin/perl-5.005
# dpkg --c
Mirek Kwasniak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Sep 24, 1999 at 11:22:02AM -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
> [...]
> > It is left like this until perl is configured and the postinst script
> > takes care of moving perl-5.005.dist to perl-5.005.
>
>
> >
> > Why does perl need to do all this hardl
On Fri, Sep 24, 1999 at 11:22:02AM -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
[...]
> It is left like this until perl is configured and the postinst script
> takes care of moving perl-5.005.dist to perl-5.005.
>
> Why does perl need to do all this hardlink magic and also leave us with a
> binary that dpkg knows
On Fri, Sep 24, 1999 at 01:46:18AM -0700, Darren/Torin/Who Ever... wrote:
>
> So, if you're getting a Perl binary that's 0600, it's either you, apt-get,
> or dpkg.
More specifically it is dpkg doing the breaking, but it's perl's fault on
how it is setting everything up.
You will note that these
"Darren/Torin/Who Ever..." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So, if you're getting a Perl binary that's 0600, it's either you, apt-get,
> or dpkg.
I've seen this on both my machines, and I've got a log here (which I
suspect is mostly a repeat of Branden's):
>(Reading database ... 8970 files and direc
On Fri, 24 Sep 1999, Branden Robinson wrote:
> [1] 1013 apocalypse ~ > ls -dl /usr/bin/perl
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 10 Sep 23 22:02 /usr/bin/perl ->
> perl-5.005
> [0] 1014 apocalypse ~ > ls -dl /usr/bin/perl-5.005
> -rw--- 1 root root 534844 Aug 19 04:29 /usr/bin/
On Fri, 24 Sep 1999, Branden Robinson wrote:
> Haven't found anyone else with this problem yet. Doogie's explanation is
> that I have somehow rigged my system to cause this. The rest of us may
> actually want to bother investigating.
I had exactly the same problem this morning... ( /usr/bin/pe
On Fri, 24 Sep 1999, Branden Robinson wrote:
> Haven't found anyone else with this problem yet. Doogie's explanation is
> that I have somehow rigged my system to cause this. The rest of us may
> actually want to bother investigating.
[lots of stuff snipped]
> /var/lib/dpkg/info/libc6.postinst:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Branden Robinson, in an immanent manifestation of deity, wrote:
>apt problem or perl problem? perl is shipping with a mode 600 executable; that
>seems pretty weird to me but I try to keep my distance from perl.
>[0] 1014 apocalypse ~ > ls -dl /usr/bin/perl-5.005
On Sep 24, Branden Robinson wrote:
> [...later...]
>
> [1] 1013 apocalypse ~ > ls -dl /usr/bin/perl
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 10 Sep 23 22:02 /usr/bin/perl ->
> perl-5.005
> [0] 1014 apocalypse ~ > ls -dl /usr/bin/perl-5.005
> -rw--- 1 root root 534844 Aug 19 04:29
Haven't found anyone else with this problem yet. Doogie's explanation is
that I have somehow rigged my system to cause this. The rest of us may
actually want to bother investigating.
apt problem or perl problem? perl is shipping with a mode 600 executable; that
seems pretty weird to me but I tr
17 matches
Mail list logo
