Bug #521
closed
syscall number clash with OpenAFS
0%
Description
From Frank B. @ Oracle:
Hey Garrett,
you may want to do the OpenAFS folks the same favour as we did via
although I can not claim I know about openAFS on illumos, you may want to
ask them here:
http://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/port-solaris
I filed this bug for them and Roger fixed it:
http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=7003018
see:
http://lists.openafs.org/pipermail/port-solaris/2010-November/thread.html
http://lists.openafs.org/pipermail/port-solaris/2010-December/thread.html
we "broke" their syscall number abuse in build 135 with:
http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6906485
this affects ON and the solaris 10 brand btw.
cheers
frankB
Updated by Albert Lee over 12 years ago
Just in case it matters in the future, it would be good to know whether all of the *at vectors were relocated for the fix, or just unlinkat.
Updated by Andrew Deason about 11 years ago
- Difficulty set to Medium
- Tags set to needs-triage
Albert Lee wrote:
Just in case it matters in the future, it would be good to know whether all of the *at vectors were relocated for the fix, or just
unlinkat.
From the release of Solaris 11, it looks like just unlinkat was moved (it was moved from 65 to 76). There are several other differences in the syscall numbers that appear to be unrelated to this... but that appears to be the only difference for the *at calls.
Any chance this could be moved in illumos?
Updated by Garrett D'Amore about 11 years ago
- Assignee set to Garrett D'Amore
I'd like to go ahead and do this. I'm going to go ahead and assign it to myself.
Updated by Garrett D'Amore 9 months ago
I guess this is probably defunct now? If it still needs to be addressed please reply here, and I can try to put together a change to do it. This feels through the cracks a decade ago. Sorry.
If it's irrelevant now, let me know and I'll just close it.
Updated by Garrett D'Amore 9 months ago
- Status changed from New to Closed
I'm closing this... I believe OpenAFS has probably made the change to use ioctl instead of custom sys calls, and nobody is using problematic versions of OpenAFS anymore. The fact that nobody else has complained in 10 years makes me convinced we can just move on.