[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] #1277 make check failure on OS X 10.11

From: Peter Bex
Subject: Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] #1277 make check failure on OS X 10.11
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2016 09:21:35 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)

On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 09:14:25AM +0200, address@hidden wrote:
> > This is an initial patchset for #1277 on which I invite comments.
> Note that I'm currently revamping the chicken-5 egg setup stuff, which means 
> that
> shell command execution will be significantly changed in that part (and will 
> probably
> not need such a change as you here propose.)
> I must say that I don't like such a wide-reaching change,

In principle I'm not against that, but this late in the release process,
introducing such a big change is not a great idea, unless we do some very
rigorous testing.

> just to let "make check"
> work on an OS as deliberately broken as OS X. Isn't there some other way? 

We could add a note to the README stating you have to disable this
broken feature.  That would be just like on Windows, where we have a note
that you must disable the virusscanner because that messes with locks
a lot.

> And does this "blacklisting" mean that it is not possible to set 
> for any invocation of an executable that calls system(3) (which uses sh)? How 
> broken 
> is that?

It's completely retarded and arbitrary.  It's security theatre, if I
understand correctly how it works; you could compile a custom copy of
sh and it would *not* block DYLD_LIBRARY_PATH.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]