From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Camm Maguire Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.gcl.devel,gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Re: unexec and fedora core 4 Date: 09 Dec 2005 10:17:50 -0500 Message-ID: <54wtiee1up.fsf@intech19.enhanced.com> References: <87hd9j42g3.fsf@jurta.org> <54acfbnjoh.fsf_-_@intech19.enhanced.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1134154424 13110 80.91.229.2 (9 Dec 2005 18:53:44 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2005 18:53:44 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Matt Kaufmann , Sandip Ray , gcl-devel@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: gcl-devel-bounces+gnu-gcl-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Dec 09 19:53:43 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EknL2-0001xv-KF for gnu-gcl-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 09 Dec 2005 19:51:25 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EknLO-0004OT-05 for gnu-gcl-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 09 Dec 2005 13:51:46 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Ekk1I-0007jo-QF for gcl-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Dec 2005 10:18:49 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Ekk0t-0007gY-2g for gcl-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Dec 2005 10:18:34 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ekk0r-0007eh-DM; Fri, 09 Dec 2005 10:18:22 -0500 Original-Received: from [67.101.227.59] (helo=intech19.enhanced.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1Ekk24-0005tk-0c; Fri, 09 Dec 2005 10:19:36 -0500 Original-Received: from camm by intech19.enhanced.com with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1Ekk0M-0003AQ-00; Fri, 09 Dec 2005 10:17:50 -0500 Original-To: Juho Snellman In-Reply-To: Original-Lines: 43 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 X-BeenThere: gcl-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: gcl-devel.gnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: gcl-devel-bounces+gnu-gcl-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: gcl-devel-bounces+gnu-gcl-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.gcl.devel:6051 gmane.emacs.devel:47323 Archived-At: Juho Snellman writes: > wrote: > > Greetings! I am a developer of GCL, which shares unexec with emacs. > > I have noticed on certain recent Fedora Core 4 machines, binaries > > produced with unexec cannot mprotect memory (allocated with brk) > > PROT_EXEC (returning EACCESS, i.e. permission denied), whereas > > binaries output by ld can do so just fine. This does not vary with > > exec-shield or randomize_va_space settings, and appears quite machine > > specific. The same binary which functions perfectly normally on one > > fc4 machine shows this failure only on another machine. I have as yet > > been unable to correlate this with dynamic library placement, or other > > settings in /proc/sys. > > Just a guess, but this might be related to SELinux. Do the machines > have differences in /etc/selinux/config? > Bingo! (I think) The config files are identical, but the problem machine has a 'strict' subdirectory with a host of files and options. Any idea of what I should look for herein, and what this could have to do with unexec vs ld? Thank you so much! > -- > Juho Snellman > > > > _______________________________________________ > Gcl-devel mailing list > Gcl-devel@gnu.org > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcl-devel > > > -- Camm Maguire camm@enhanced.com ========================================================================== "The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens." -- Baha'u'llah