From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756881AbYDUSi5 (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Apr 2008 14:38:57 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752278AbYDUSit (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Apr 2008 14:38:49 -0400 Received: from smtp109.sbc.mail.re2.yahoo.com ([68.142.229.96]:37876 "HELO smtp109.sbc.mail.re2.yahoo.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1752171AbYDUSit (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Apr 2008 14:38:49 -0400 X-YMail-OSG: HBrA8PMVM1kvflmnd5GcQtx7TOvIA6e7louyPI.Z.RwMb4N5LzRqlylkcvLQG0deJOo2m2aJjzjUZqCQ1a_wAtwHJMCVo1gnjxfCVg-- X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2008 13:34:51 -0500 From: serge@hallyn.com To: David R Cc: serge@hallyn.com, casey@schaufler-ca.com, Mike Galbraith , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Andrew Morgan Subject: Re: 2.6.25 Kernel - Problems with capabilities Message-ID: <20080421183451.GA22071@vino.hallyn.com> References: <46016.36939.qm@web36608.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <480B7D72.7020503@unsolicited.net> <20080421000055.GA17510@vino.hallyn.com> <20080421080101.htzh4s03snescog4@unsolicited.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080421080101.htzh4s03snescog4@unsolicited.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Quoting David R (david@unsolicited.net): > Quoting serge@hallyn.com: > > > Quoting David (david@unsolicited.net): > >> Casey Schaufler wrote: > >>> Do you have a libcap that reflects the change from 32 capabilities > >>> to 64? You'll be looking for libcap.so.2.06 or thereabouts. > >>> > >> Adding libcap-2.08 and recompiling ntpd has fixed the issue, and I'm now > >> running normally, thanks! > > > > I don't understand why, though. Looking at the ntpd code (ntp-4.2.4p4) > > it just does a cap_set_proc(cap_from_text("X=epi")); It should simply > > be sending in the _LINUX_CAPABILITY_VERSION which shipped with libcap, > > which should have been _V1, and the kernel should honor that so long as > > you didn't try to send in caps > 31, which ntpd wasn't. > > > >> Was this userspace visible change planned in advance for 2.6.25 ? ... as I > >> guess a few other people with venerable old userspace components may come > >> across this issue. > >> > >> Cheers > >> David > > > > It's been in the works a long time and we thought we'd done pretty > > well with backward compatibility. I really don't see why you had > > that failure! > > > > Do you know which version of libcap you had before? > > /lib/libcap.so.1 -> libcap.so.1.92 > > I guess that's 1.92 (should be the version shipped with SuSE 9.1). Ok, thanks, then it's definately not what I was thinking. (Will wait to check out your strace) thanks, -serge