Fri, 13 May 2016 17:16:19 -0400 RD Thrush <openbsd-t...@thrush.com> > On 05/13/16 11:07, Theo de Raadt wrote: > >> Since the anti-ROP mechanism in libc [2] was added in late April, -current > >> with read-only /usr produces something like the following message: > >> re-ordering libraries:install: /usr/lib/INS@OPOjn7ck17: Read-only file > >> system > > > > Look, your statement is false. I can install a snapshot right now, > > and I won't see what you report. > > The report is fairly easy to reproduce. Make the /usr filesystem read-only > in /etc/fstab, go to single user mode and exit back to multi-user. I've > appended a transcript.
Then don't do what you report and it won't happen, it's like putting a stick in your feet and complaining you nose dive roughly reproducible. > > That is the result of a mis-configuration on your part. > > It's unfortunate that mounting /usr read-only is now a mis-configuration. Yes, unlucky to be you having to do it and file a report that you did. > >> I thought I was following best practice by mounting /usr, > >> /usr/X11R6, and /usr/local read-only. I submitted a bug report and a > >> patch to fix my problem [2] but have had no response. > > > > That is not best practice. If it was, we would be heading towards > > making it the default. > > > > And why is not best practice? Because it stands directly against the > > primary purpose of OpenBSD: A development platform, where people > > constantly rebuild their binaries, iterating and fixing bugs. > > > > What you are describing here is really just "you make a local change, > > you own it".
