TCP Wrappers

TCP Wrappers

[Prentis Brooks]

Alright, 
	finally read over the setup.html file and built up the src and binary 
packages.  Writing up the setup.hint file now.  I have the following:

# TCP Wrappers
@ tcp_wrappers_7.6
sdesc: "TCP Wrappers"
ldesc: "TCP Wrappers: Tool to provide host based access restrictions to tcp 
base
d services"
skip:
curr: 7.6
prev:
test:
category:
requires:

Does what I have look right, and what category should I put this into?  I 
don't think this requires much beyond cygwin.  Going to look at the setup.ini 
to see if there are other requirements that make sense.  

Feedback appreciated.

-- 
Prentis Brooks	| prentis@aol.net | 703-265-0914 | AIM: PrentisBrooks
Senior System Administrator - Web Infrastructure & Security

       A knight is sworn to valor.  His heart knows only virtue.  His blade
       defends the helpless.  His word speaks only truth.  His wrath undoes
       the wicked. - the old code of Bowen, last of the dragonslayers

Re: TCP Wrappers

[Charles Wilson]

Prentis Brooks wrote:

> Alright, 
> 	finally read over the setup.html file and built up the src and binary 
> packages.  Writing up the setup.hint file now.  I have the following:
> 
> # TCP Wrappers
> @ tcp_wrappers_7.6


This line is not necessary -- it is created in setup.ini by the upset 
script; it doesn't need to appear in setup.hint


> sdesc: "TCP Wrappers"


You don't need to put the name into the descriptions anymore; setup.exe 
will automatically add the name.  I would suggest

sdesc: "Tool to provide host based access restrictions in tcp services"
ldesc: "With this package you can monitor and filter incoming requests 
for the
SYSTAT, FINGER, FTP, TELNET, RLOGIN, RSH, EXEC, TFTP, TALK, and other
network services.

The package provides tiny daemon wrapper programs that can be installed
without any changes to existing software or to existing configuration
files.  The wrappers report the name of the client host and of the
requested service; the wrappers do not exchange information with the
client or server applications, and impose no overhead on the actual
conversation between the client and server applications."


> ldesc: "TCP Wrappers: Tool to provide host based access restrictions to tcp 
> base
> d services"
> skip:
> curr: 7.6
> prev:
> test:


You don't need to specify these at all.  The upset script will figure it 
out and put "the right thing" into setup.ini.  You only need to specify 
these manually within setup.hint if the upset parser gets it wrong.

> category:
> requires:


category: Net
requires: cygwin


> 
> Does what I have look right, and what category should I put this into?  I 
> don't think this requires much beyond cygwin.  Going to look at the setup.ini 
> to see if there are other requirements that make sense.  
> 
> Feedback appreciated.
> 
> 


--Chuck

Re: TCP Wrappers

[Prentis Brooks]

Thanks Chuck, If you don't mind my cut and paste with little to no 
modifications, I will take your suggestions, they sound better than my last 
clean up.

On Thursday 07 February 2002 01:53 pm, Charles Wilson wrote:
> Prentis Brooks wrote:
> > Alright,
> > 	finally read over the setup.html file and built up the src and binary
> > packages.  Writing up the setup.hint file now.  I have the following:
> >
> > # TCP Wrappers
> > @ tcp_wrappers_7.6
>
> This line is not necessary -- it is created in setup.ini by the upset
> script; it doesn't need to appear in setup.hint
>
> > sdesc: "TCP Wrappers"
>
> You don't need to put the name into the descriptions anymore; setup.exe
> will automatically add the name.  I would suggest
>
> sdesc: "Tool to provide host based access restrictions in tcp services"
> ldesc: "With this package you can monitor and filter incoming requests
> for the
> SYSTAT, FINGER, FTP, TELNET, RLOGIN, RSH, EXEC, TFTP, TALK, and other
> network services.
>
> The package provides tiny daemon wrapper programs that can be installed
> without any changes to existing software or to existing configuration
> files.  The wrappers report the name of the client host and of the
> requested service; the wrappers do not exchange information with the
> client or server applications, and impose no overhead on the actual
> conversation between the client and server applications."
>
> > ldesc: "TCP Wrappers: Tool to provide host based access restrictions to
> > tcp base
> > d services"
> > skip:
> > curr: 7.6
> > prev:
> > test:
>
> You don't need to specify these at all.  The upset script will figure it
> out and put "the right thing" into setup.ini.  You only need to specify
> these manually within setup.hint if the upset parser gets it wrong.
>
> > category:
> > requires:
>
> category: Net
> requires: cygwin
>
> > Does what I have look right, and what category should I put this into?  I
> > don't think this requires much beyond cygwin.  Going to look at the
> > setup.ini to see if there are other requirements that make sense.
> >
> > Feedback appreciated.
>
> --Chuck

-- 
Prentis Brooks	| prentis@aol.net | 703-265-0914 | AIM: PrentisBrooks
Senior System Administrator - Web Infrastructure & Security

       A knight is sworn to valor.  His heart knows only virtue.  His blade
       defends the helpless.  His word speaks only truth.  His wrath undoes
       the wicked. - the old code of Bowen, last of the dragonslayers

Re: TCP Wrappers

[Prentis Brooks]

Either way, I am going to work on it.  It will be a good exercise in
creating DLL's for Cygwin.  My only concern is that I am not sure how
active the upstream maintainer is.  If you check the porcupine site, tcp
wrappers hasn't been modified since 1997.  Of course, not that many
changes have been introduced.  This may make the diff, we will see.


On Thu, 27 Jun 2002, Charles Wilson wrote:

> Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> 
> > It clarifies.  I was just confused how inetd comes into play here.
> > 
> > Just consider that if the usage of a tcp wrappers dll actually
> > requires us to change sshd code, I'd better live with static linking.
> > libwrap.a isn't that big.
> 
> 
> All true.  However, if the API of libwrap needs to change in order to 
> support building shared libs on certain platforms (cygwin, native 
> windows), then that'll happen at the upstream tcp maintainer level.
> 
> Which, IF he did that, would cause a ripple effect as the various 
> changes to client code were added all over the opensourcesphere. 
> Fortunately, given the .so versioning tools, this wouldn't break 
> existing builds of, say, openssh on linux.
> 
> But to get this patch to the point where the upstream maintainer would 
> even consider it, someone "down here" -- like Prentis -- needs to 
> develop and test the patch.  (That's what I did w.r.t. ncurses, 
> readline, etc).  Then, push it upstream and see if it'll be accepted.
> 
> Whether cygwin's version of openssh adapts to the dllized API or not is 
> of course up to Corinna.  (Although, this does present one problem: if 
> Corinna doesn't want to use the modified API, then Prentis will have to 
> maintain two APIs -- one for the DLL and one for the statlib, using 
> #ifndef WITH_LIBWRAP_DLL guards in tcpd.h....blech)
> 
> --Chuck
> 
> 

-- 
Prentis Brooks	| prentis@aol.net | 703-265-0914 | AIM: PrentisBrooks
Senior System Administrator - Web Infrastructure & Security

       A knight is sworn to valor.  His heart knows only virtue.  His blade
       defends the helpless.  His word speaks only truth.  His wrath undoes
       the wicked. - the old code of Bowen, last of the dragonslayers

Re: TCP Wrappers

[Charles Wilson]

Corinna Vinschen wrote:

> It clarifies.  I was just confused how inetd comes into play here.
> 
> Just consider that if the usage of a tcp wrappers dll actually
> requires us to change sshd code, I'd better live with static linking.
> libwrap.a isn't that big.


All true.  However, if the API of libwrap needs to change in order to 
support building shared libs on certain platforms (cygwin, native 
windows), then that'll happen at the upstream tcp maintainer level.

Which, IF he did that, would cause a ripple effect as the various 
changes to client code were added all over the opensourcesphere. 
Fortunately, given the .so versioning tools, this wouldn't break 
existing builds of, say, openssh on linux.

But to get this patch to the point where the upstream maintainer would 
even consider it, someone "down here" -- like Prentis -- needs to 
develop and test the patch.  (That's what I did w.r.t. ncurses, 
readline, etc).  Then, push it upstream and see if it'll be accepted.

Whether cygwin's version of openssh adapts to the dllized API or not is 
of course up to Corinna.  (Although, this does present one problem: if 
Corinna doesn't want to use the modified API, then Prentis will have to 
maintain two APIs -- one for the DLL and one for the statlib, using 
#ifndef WITH_LIBWRAP_DLL guards in tcpd.h....blech)

--Chuck

Re: TCP Wrappers

[Corinna Vinschen]

On Thu, Jun 27, 2002 at 10:21:20AM -0400, Prentis Brooks wrote:
> Ok, I was basing my response on the info I got from Charles, where he
> pointed out that libwrap declares certain ints as extern, leaving tcpd
> and ssh to define them.   I am not familiar with DLL's so I am going
> solely by what he says, which I expect is accurate considering the work
> he has already done.  According to his email, these externally defined
> ints work fine when linked statically, but not in a DLL.  He suggested
> that I go through and change the libwrap library to define these
> variable and export them to the applications.  Once that is done, I have
> to go through the applications and stop them from declaring these
> variables themselves (this is the part where I do a lot of reading).  
> 
> Regarding changes to ssh, that is based on the assumption that ssh, like
> tcpd, declares these ints itself and would need similiar edits to work
> with the DLL.  Regarding the inetd, I was actually talking about making
> the edits to tcpd and using inetd to test the functionality, since that
> is the only other place I have used tcpwrap other than in SSH.
> 
> Does that clarify or have I muddied the water further?

It clarifies.  I was just confused how inetd comes into play here.

Just consider that if the usage of a tcp wrappers dll actually
requires us to change sshd code, I'd better live with static linking.
libwrap.a isn't that big.

Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Developer                                mailto:cygwin@cygwin.com
Red Hat, Inc.

Re: TCP Wrappers

[Prentis Brooks]

Yeah, my thoughts as well, we really don't want to deviate too far from
the base package.  Let me tinker and see how it works, will let you know
what I find :)

On Thu, 27 Jun 2002, Corinna Vinschen wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 27, 2002 at 10:21:20AM -0400, Prentis Brooks wrote:
> > Ok, I was basing my response on the info I got from Charles, where he
> > pointed out that libwrap declares certain ints as extern, leaving tcpd
> > and ssh to define them.   I am not familiar with DLL's so I am going
> > solely by what he says, which I expect is accurate considering the work
> > he has already done.  According to his email, these externally defined
> > ints work fine when linked statically, but not in a DLL.  He suggested
> > that I go through and change the libwrap library to define these
> > variable and export them to the applications.  Once that is done, I have
> > to go through the applications and stop them from declaring these
> > variables themselves (this is the part where I do a lot of reading).  
> > 
> > Regarding changes to ssh, that is based on the assumption that ssh, like
> > tcpd, declares these ints itself and would need similiar edits to work
> > with the DLL.  Regarding the inetd, I was actually talking about making
> > the edits to tcpd and using inetd to test the functionality, since that
> > is the only other place I have used tcpwrap other than in SSH.
> > 
> > Does that clarify or have I muddied the water further?
> 
> It clarifies.  I was just confused how inetd comes into play here.
> 
> Just consider that if the usage of a tcp wrappers dll actually
> requires us to change sshd code, I'd better live with static linking.
> libwrap.a isn't that big.
> 
> Corinna
> 
> 

-- 
Prentis Brooks	| prentis@aol.net | 703-265-0914 | AIM: PrentisBrooks
Senior System Administrator - Web Infrastructure & Security

       A knight is sworn to valor.  His heart knows only virtue.  His blade
       defends the helpless.  His word speaks only truth.  His wrath undoes
       the wicked. - the old code of Bowen, last of the dragonslayers

Re: TCP Wrappers

[Prentis Brooks]

Ok, I was basing my response on the info I got from Charles, where he
pointed out that libwrap declares certain ints as extern, leaving tcpd
and ssh to define them.   I am not familiar with DLL's so I am going
solely by what he says, which I expect is accurate considering the work
he has already done.  According to his email, these externally defined
ints work fine when linked statically, but not in a DLL.  He suggested
that I go through and change the libwrap library to define these
variable and export them to the applications.  Once that is done, I have
to go through the applications and stop them from declaring these
variables themselves (this is the part where I do a lot of reading).  

Regarding changes to ssh, that is based on the assumption that ssh, like
tcpd, declares these ints itself and would need similiar edits to work
with the DLL.  Regarding the inetd, I was actually talking about making
the edits to tcpd and using inetd to test the functionality, since that
is the only other place I have used tcpwrap other than in SSH.

Does that clarify or have I muddied the water further?


On Thu, 27 Jun 2002, Corinna Vinschen wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 27, 2002 at 09:51:23AM -0400, Prentis Brooks wrote:
> > Thanks Corinna, I have already started looking at dll'izing the code.
> > Will be working on it through the weekend on a virtual machine as I
> > expect I will break things while trying to get it to work ;)  I expect I
> > should be able to have it working with inetd within a month or so
> > (giving time for work, moving, etc).   Once I have it working with
> > inetd, I will bundle it up and let you test with sshd.  I am not wanting
> > to dig through sshd for all the changes that may need to go there.
> 
> Prentis,
> 
> I don't quite understand what the dll has to do with inetd.  Since
> inetd is using tcpd, it's never linked against libwrap anyway.
> 
> It's actually not that hard.  If sshd is working when linked against
> the static lib, it very likely works using the dll.  You don't even
> have to change ssh's makefile since the Cygwin ld links against the
> dll first, if available.
> 
> However, I've found a problem when sshd is linked against tcp wrappers
> but AFAICS it's a flaw in Cygwin.
> 
> Corinna
> 
> 

-- 
Prentis Brooks	| prentis@aol.net | 703-265-0914 | AIM: PrentisBrooks
Senior System Administrator - Web Infrastructure & Security

       A knight is sworn to valor.  His heart knows only virtue.  His blade
       defends the helpless.  His word speaks only truth.  His wrath undoes
       the wicked. - the old code of Bowen, last of the dragonslayers

Re: TCP Wrappers

[Corinna Vinschen]

On Thu, Jun 27, 2002 at 09:51:23AM -0400, Prentis Brooks wrote:
> Thanks Corinna, I have already started looking at dll'izing the code.
> Will be working on it through the weekend on a virtual machine as I
> expect I will break things while trying to get it to work ;)  I expect I
> should be able to have it working with inetd within a month or so
> (giving time for work, moving, etc).   Once I have it working with
> inetd, I will bundle it up and let you test with sshd.  I am not wanting
> to dig through sshd for all the changes that may need to go there.

Prentis,

I don't quite understand what the dll has to do with inetd.  Since
inetd is using tcpd, it's never linked against libwrap anyway.

It's actually not that hard.  If sshd is working when linked against
the static lib, it very likely works using the dll.  You don't even
have to change ssh's makefile since the Cygwin ld links against the
dll first, if available.

However, I've found a problem when sshd is linked against tcp wrappers
but AFAICS it's a flaw in Cygwin.

Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Developer                                mailto:cygwin@cygwin.com
Red Hat, Inc.

Re: TCP Wrappers

[Prentis Brooks]

Thanks Corinna, I have already started looking at dll'izing the code.
Will be working on it through the weekend on a virtual machine as I
expect I will break things while trying to get it to work ;)  I expect I
should be able to have it working with inetd within a month or so
(giving time for work, moving, etc).   Once I have it working with
inetd, I will bundle it up and let you test with sshd.  I am not wanting
to dig through sshd for all the changes that may need to go there.


On Thu, 27 Jun 2002, Corinna Vinschen wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 26, 2002 at 12:46:30PM -0400, Prentis Brooks wrote:
> > As you wish *grin*
> > 
> > http://www.stonegard.com/cygwin/tcp_wrappers_7.6/tcp_wrappers-7.6-1-src.tar.bz2
> > http://www.stonegard.com/cygwin/tcp_wrappers_7.6/tcp_wrappers-7.6-1.tar.bz2
> > http://www.stonegard.com/cygwin/tcp_wrappers_7.6/setup.hint
> 
> I've tested it at home and it plays nicely with inetd.
> 
> So I've uploaded it to sourceware.  Please send an announcement to
> cygwin-announce@cygwin.com in a few hours, according to 
> http://cygwin.com/setup.html#submitting, section 9.
> 
> 
> When this package has settled down in a few weeks, I think I will
> release a new OpenSSH package with tcp-wrappers support.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> Corinna
> 
> 

-- 
Prentis Brooks	| prentis@aol.net | 703-265-0914 | AIM: PrentisBrooks
Senior System Administrator - Web Infrastructure & Security

       A knight is sworn to valor.  His heart knows only virtue.  His blade
       defends the helpless.  His word speaks only truth.  His wrath undoes
       the wicked. - the old code of Bowen, last of the dragonslayers

Re: TCP Wrappers

[Corinna Vinschen]

On Wed, Jun 26, 2002 at 12:46:30PM -0400, Prentis Brooks wrote:
> As you wish *grin*
> 
> http://www.stonegard.com/cygwin/tcp_wrappers_7.6/tcp_wrappers-7.6-1-src.tar.bz2
> http://www.stonegard.com/cygwin/tcp_wrappers_7.6/tcp_wrappers-7.6-1.tar.bz2
> http://www.stonegard.com/cygwin/tcp_wrappers_7.6/setup.hint

I've tested it at home and it plays nicely with inetd.

So I've uploaded it to sourceware.  Please send an announcement to
cygwin-announce@cygwin.com in a few hours, according to 
http://cygwin.com/setup.html#submitting, section 9.


When this package has settled down in a few weeks, I think I will
release a new OpenSSH package with tcp-wrappers support.


Thanks,
Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Developer                                mailto:cygwin@cygwin.com
Red Hat, Inc.

Re: TCP Wrappers

[Prentis Brooks]

As you wish *grin*

http://www.stonegard.com/cygwin/tcp_wrappers_7.6/tcp_wrappers-7.6-1-src.tar.bz2
http://www.stonegard.com/cygwin/tcp_wrappers_7.6/tcp_wrappers-7.6-1.tar.bz2
http://www.stonegard.com/cygwin/tcp_wrappers_7.6/setup.hint


# TCP Wrappers
sdesc: "TCP Wrappers, Tool to provide host based access restrictions in
tcp services"
ldesc: "TCP Wrappers, With this package you can monitor and filter
incoming
requests for the SYSTAT, FINGER, FTP, TELNET, RLOGIN, RSH, EXEC, TFTP,
TALK,
and other network services.

The package provides tiny daemon wrapper programs that can be installed
without any changes to existing software or to existing configuration
files.  The wrappers report the name of the client host and of the
requested service; the wrappers do not exchange information with the
client or server applications, and impose no overhead on the actual
conversation between the client and server applications."
category: Net
requires: cygwin


On Wed, 26 Jun 2002, Corinna Vinschen wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 26, 2002 at 10:23:35AM -0400, Prentis Brooks wrote:
> > Ok, the packages are now ready for someone to upload them to the
> > distribution.  Sorry for the delay, work and life intruded with a
> > vengence.  Let me know if there is anything still missing, I pretty
> > much, just did as Charles Wilson suggested (thanks for the script
> > Charles).  I will be working with trying to get a DLL version done,
> > hopefully sooner than I got to this.
> > 
> > Packages can be found at the following location:
> > 
> > http://www.stonegard.com/cygwin/tcp_wrappers_7.6/
> 
> Please send the full paths to the files and the full content of your
> setup.hint file to this list.
> 
> Thanks,
> Corinna
> 
> 

-- 
Prentis Brooks	| prentis@aol.net | 703-265-0914 | AIM: PrentisBrooks
Senior System Administrator - Web Infrastructure & Security

       A knight is sworn to valor.  His heart knows only virtue.  His blade
       defends the helpless.  His word speaks only truth.  His wrath undoes
       the wicked. - the old code of Bowen, last of the dragonslayers

Re: TCP Wrappers

[Corinna Vinschen]

On Wed, Jun 26, 2002 at 10:23:35AM -0400, Prentis Brooks wrote:
> Ok, the packages are now ready for someone to upload them to the
> distribution.  Sorry for the delay, work and life intruded with a
> vengence.  Let me know if there is anything still missing, I pretty
> much, just did as Charles Wilson suggested (thanks for the script
> Charles).  I will be working with trying to get a DLL version done,
> hopefully sooner than I got to this.
> 
> Packages can be found at the following location:
> 
> http://www.stonegard.com/cygwin/tcp_wrappers_7.6/

Please send the full paths to the files and the full content of your
setup.hint file to this list.

Thanks,
Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Developer                                mailto:cygwin@cygwin.com
Red Hat, Inc.

TCP Wrappers

[Prentis Brooks]

Ok, the packages are now ready for someone to upload them to the
distribution.  Sorry for the delay, work and life intruded with a
vengence.  Let me know if there is anything still missing, I pretty
much, just did as Charles Wilson suggested (thanks for the script
Charles).  I will be working with trying to get a DLL version done,
hopefully sooner than I got to this.

Packages can be found at the following location:

http://www.stonegard.com/cygwin/tcp_wrappers_7.6/


-- 
Prentis Brooks	| prentis@aol.net | 703-265-0914 | AIM: PrentisBrooks
Senior System Administrator - Web Infrastructure & Security

       A knight is sworn to valor.  His heart knows only virtue.  His blade
       defends the helpless.  His word speaks only truth.  His wrath undoes
       the wicked. - the old code of Bowen, last of the dragonslayers

Re: TCP Wrappers

[Prentis Brooks]

Ok, I will do that.  I haven't seen your email, is there someplace I can
go grab your changes, I just went through and re-read the conversation
and I think I originally missed your meaning for the -src problems.  I
thought I followed the docs on cygwin.com.  I will definately look at
your mods and compare them to what I read.  Then I will either send the
list any errors there or recommend clarification since something didn't
make sense... or, I will correct my own processor ;)

On Wed, 3 Apr 2002, Charles Wilson wrote:

> As is, the -src package will build the static lib and create the 
> executables without problems.  It is probably okay -- once you've tested 
> the build and checked functionality -- to call that "tcp_wrappers-7.6-1" 
> as is, without worrying about DLLs yet.
> 
> Then, at your leisure, you can attempt to fixup the allow_severity 
> problem, and release -2 with the DLL.
> 
> --Chuck
> 
> Prentis Brooks wrote:
> 
> > Wow, Thanks Chuck!!  I really appreciate that, I will look for your
> > email and then start work on the other changes this weekend.  Should
> > have something by Monday.
> > 
> > On Wed, 3 Apr 2002, Charles Wilson wrote:
> > 
> > 
> >>I've whipped up a repackaged version of your -src, that follows the 
> >>approved conventions.  Also, it uses a shell script to control building, 
> >>and installs the man pages, header file, has a postinstall script to 
> >>create /etc/hosts.allow/deny if they dont already exist, etc.
> >>
> >>I'll mail it to you privately, Prentis.
> >>
> >>The "hooks" are there to build/install the DLL version, but the 
> >>allow_severity/deny_severity problem I referred to in my earlier message 
> >>has to be fixed first, then you can uncomment the "hooks" in Makefile 
> >>and in the shell script.
> >>
> >>--Chuck
> >>
> >>
> >>Prentis Brooks wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> I am willing to look into this, it currently does not use libtool, so I
> >>> have a lot of mods to make that happen, if I understood cgf right.
> >>>
> >>> I get cable modem today so I will be able to do more from home now ;)
> >>>
> >>>On Wed, 3 Apr 2002, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 09:06:55AM -0500, Prentis Brooks wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>Hey Guys, what is the status of the TCP Wrapper upload?  I got an email
> >>>>>
> >>>>>from Rob stating that he had problems getting to the files, I fixed the
> >>>>
> >>>>>problem and responded, but no word since.  
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>I've uploaded it to the contrib area.  I took the freedom to rename
> >>>>the package from "tcp_wrappers_7.6..." to "tcp_wrappers-7.6...", just
> >>>>a dash instead of an underscore in front of the version number.
> >>>>
> >>>>Prepare to announce in a few hours.
> >>>>
> >>>>Btw., IMHO it would be really nice to get libwrap as a DLL in a near
> >>>>future.  I'd like to link OpenSSH dynamically against tcp wrappers...
> >>>>
> >>>>Thanks,
> >>>>Corinna
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> > 
> 
> 

-- 
Prentis Brooks	| prentis@aol.net | 703-265-0914 | AIM: PrentisBrooks
Senior System Administrator - Web Infrastructure & Security

       A knight is sworn to valor.  His heart knows only virtue.  His blade
       defends the helpless.  His word speaks only truth.  His wrath undoes
       the wicked. - the old code of Bowen, last of the dragonslayers

Re: TCP Wrappers

[Corinna Vinschen]

On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 06:49:43PM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote:
> As is, the -src package will build the static lib and create the 
> executables without problems.  It is probably okay -- once you've tested 
> the build and checked functionality -- to call that "tcp_wrappers-7.6-1" 
> as is, without worrying about DLLs yet.
> 
> Then, at your leisure, you can attempt to fixup the allow_severity 
> problem, and release -2 with the DLL.

Sounds like a good plan to me...

> --Chuck

Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Developer                                mailto:cygwin@cygwin.com
Red Hat, Inc.

Re: TCP Wrappers

[Charles Wilson]

As is, the -src package will build the static lib and create the 
executables without problems.  It is probably okay -- once you've tested 
the build and checked functionality -- to call that "tcp_wrappers-7.6-1" 
as is, without worrying about DLLs yet.

Then, at your leisure, you can attempt to fixup the allow_severity 
problem, and release -2 with the DLL.

--Chuck

Prentis Brooks wrote:

> Wow, Thanks Chuck!!  I really appreciate that, I will look for your
> email and then start work on the other changes this weekend.  Should
> have something by Monday.
> 
> On Wed, 3 Apr 2002, Charles Wilson wrote:
> 
> 
>>I've whipped up a repackaged version of your -src, that follows the 
>>approved conventions.  Also, it uses a shell script to control building, 
>>and installs the man pages, header file, has a postinstall script to 
>>create /etc/hosts.allow/deny if they dont already exist, etc.
>>
>>I'll mail it to you privately, Prentis.
>>
>>The "hooks" are there to build/install the DLL version, but the 
>>allow_severity/deny_severity problem I referred to in my earlier message 
>>has to be fixed first, then you can uncomment the "hooks" in Makefile 
>>and in the shell script.
>>
>>--Chuck
>>
>>
>>Prentis Brooks wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I am willing to look into this, it currently does not use libtool, so I
>>> have a lot of mods to make that happen, if I understood cgf right.
>>>
>>> I get cable modem today so I will be able to do more from home now ;)
>>>
>>>On Wed, 3 Apr 2002, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 09:06:55AM -0500, Prentis Brooks wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Hey Guys, what is the status of the TCP Wrapper upload?  I got an email
>>>>>
>>>>>from Rob stating that he had problems getting to the files, I fixed the
>>>>
>>>>>problem and responded, but no word since.  
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>I've uploaded it to the contrib area.  I took the freedom to rename
>>>>the package from "tcp_wrappers_7.6..." to "tcp_wrappers-7.6...", just
>>>>a dash instead of an underscore in front of the version number.
>>>>
>>>>Prepare to announce in a few hours.
>>>>
>>>>Btw., IMHO it would be really nice to get libwrap as a DLL in a near
>>>>future.  I'd like to link OpenSSH dynamically against tcp wrappers...
>>>>
>>>>Thanks,
>>>>Corinna
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
> 

Re: TCP Wrappers

[Prentis Brooks]

Cool, hadn't read all of the replies before responding to your email.


On Wed, 3 Apr 2002, Christopher Faylor wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 02:53:23PM -0500, Prentis Brooks wrote:
> >Ok, maybe I just misunderstood your replies to someone asking for
> >dll'ization or maybe it was you who asked for it.  Basically, here is
> >the situation, TCP Wrappers only has a single Makefile, no configure or
> >libtool (understand, I am not completely understanding all of the
> >components involved with building the dll).  If I understood the
> >previous conversation then I would need libtool support to simplify the
> >dll generation.  If I misunderstood, then I can play with the info given
> >below by Christopher and start trying to make it work.
> 
> You don't *need* libtool, imo.  None cygwin, mingw, w32api use it and they
> get along just fine.
> 
> cgf
> 

-- 
Prentis Brooks	| prentis@aol.net | 703-265-0914 | AIM: PrentisBrooks
Senior System Administrator - Web Infrastructure & Security

       A knight is sworn to valor.  His heart knows only virtue.  His blade
       defends the helpless.  His word speaks only truth.  His wrath undoes
       the wicked. - the old code of Bowen, last of the dragonslayers

Re: TCP Wrappers

[Christopher Faylor]

On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 02:53:23PM -0500, Prentis Brooks wrote:
>Ok, maybe I just misunderstood your replies to someone asking for
>dll'ization or maybe it was you who asked for it.  Basically, here is
>the situation, TCP Wrappers only has a single Makefile, no configure or
>libtool (understand, I am not completely understanding all of the
>components involved with building the dll).  If I understood the
>previous conversation then I would need libtool support to simplify the
>dll generation.  If I misunderstood, then I can play with the info given
>below by Christopher and start trying to make it work.

You don't *need* libtool, imo.  None cygwin, mingw, w32api use it and they
get along just fine.

cgf

Re: TCP Wrappers

[Prentis Brooks]

Wow, Thanks Chuck!!  I really appreciate that, I will look for your
email and then start work on the other changes this weekend.  Should
have something by Monday.

On Wed, 3 Apr 2002, Charles Wilson wrote:

> I've whipped up a repackaged version of your -src, that follows the 
> approved conventions.  Also, it uses a shell script to control building, 
> and installs the man pages, header file, has a postinstall script to 
> create /etc/hosts.allow/deny if they dont already exist, etc.
> 
> I'll mail it to you privately, Prentis.
> 
> The "hooks" are there to build/install the DLL version, but the 
> allow_severity/deny_severity problem I referred to in my earlier message 
> has to be fixed first, then you can uncomment the "hooks" in Makefile 
> and in the shell script.
> 
> --Chuck
> 
> 
> Prentis Brooks wrote:
> 
> >  I am willing to look into this, it currently does not use libtool, so I
> >  have a lot of mods to make that happen, if I understood cgf right.
> > 
> >  I get cable modem today so I will be able to do more from home now ;)
> > 
> > On Wed, 3 Apr 2002, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > 
> > 
> >>On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 09:06:55AM -0500, Prentis Brooks wrote:
> >>
> >>>Hey Guys, what is the status of the TCP Wrapper upload?  I got an email
> >>>from Rob stating that he had problems getting to the files, I fixed the
> >>>problem and responded, but no word since.  
> >>>
> >>I've uploaded it to the contrib area.  I took the freedom to rename
> >>the package from "tcp_wrappers_7.6..." to "tcp_wrappers-7.6...", just
> >>a dash instead of an underscore in front of the version number.
> >>
> >>Prepare to announce in a few hours.
> >>
> >>Btw., IMHO it would be really nice to get libwrap as a DLL in a near
> >>future.  I'd like to link OpenSSH dynamically against tcp wrappers...
> >>
> >>Thanks,
> >>Corinna
> >>
> >>
> >>
> > 
> 
> 

-- 
Prentis Brooks	| prentis@aol.net | 703-265-0914 | AIM: PrentisBrooks
Senior System Administrator - Web Infrastructure & Security

       A knight is sworn to valor.  His heart knows only virtue.  His blade
       defends the helpless.  His word speaks only truth.  His wrath undoes
       the wicked. - the old code of Bowen, last of the dragonslayers

Re: TCP Wrappers

[Prentis Brooks]

wheeee, I am going to have fun this weekend ;)


On Wed, 3 Apr 2002, Charles Wilson wrote:

> Mostly correct.  Unfortnately, libwrap is bad.  It uses an int 
> (allow_severity and deny_severity) that are expected to be defined in 
> the application (so, tcpd.h says 'extern int allow_severity').
> 
> This is okay in a static lib, but not in a DLL.  instead, stuff must be 
> changed around so that the library itself defines those variables, and 
> exports them to the applications -- AND the applications must NOT 
> declare them...which means patches to main() in tcpd, tcpdmatch, 
> safe-finger, etc.
> 
> And sshd.
> 
> --Chuck
> 
> Christopher Faylor wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 12:37:25PM -0500, Prentis Brooks wrote:
> > 
> >>I am willing to look into this, it currently does not use libtool, so I
> >>have a lot of mods to make that happen, if I understood cgf right.
> >>
> > 
> > I don't remember saying this.
> > 
> > It *should* be as simple as saying
> > 
> > gcc -Wl,--export-all-symbols -shared -o foo.dll -Wl,--out-implib,cygfoo.a *.o
> > 
> > but I guess it rarely is.
> > 
> > (I know the above is probably missing some crucial piece or other, I'm
> > just vaguely showing how it should work.)
> > 
> > cgf
> > 
> 
> 

-- 
Prentis Brooks	| prentis@aol.net | 703-265-0914 | AIM: PrentisBrooks
Senior System Administrator - Web Infrastructure & Security

       A knight is sworn to valor.  His heart knows only virtue.  His blade
       defends the helpless.  His word speaks only truth.  His wrath undoes
       the wicked. - the old code of Bowen, last of the dragonslayers

Re: TCP Wrappers

[Prentis Brooks]

Ok, maybe I just misunderstood your replies to someone asking for
dll'ization or maybe it was you who asked for it.  Basically, here is
the situation, TCP Wrappers only has a single Makefile, no configure or
libtool (understand, I am not completely understanding all of the
components involved with building the dll).  If I understood the
previous conversation then I would need libtool support to simplify the
dll generation.  If I misunderstood, then I can play with the info given
below by Christopher and start trying to make it work.

I should be able to work on it this weekend and start playing with it
then.  If I can get a dll built, then I will probably test building
openssh against it (may have to ping Corrinna about doing that as again
this goes into uncharted cygwin waters for me.  Good practice and a
learning experience, but I may need help initially)


On Wed, 3 Apr 2002, Christopher Faylor wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 12:37:25PM -0500, Prentis Brooks wrote:
> > I am willing to look into this, it currently does not use libtool, so I
> > have a lot of mods to make that happen, if I understood cgf right.
> 
> I don't remember saying this.
> 
> It *should* be as simple as saying
> 
> gcc -Wl,--export-all-symbols -shared -o foo.dll -Wl,--out-implib,cygfoo.a *.o
> 
> but I guess it rarely is.
> 
> (I know the above is probably missing some crucial piece or other, I'm
> just vaguely showing how it should work.)
> 
> cgf
> 

-- 
Prentis Brooks	| prentis@aol.net | 703-265-0914 | AIM: PrentisBrooks
Senior System Administrator - Web Infrastructure & Security

       A knight is sworn to valor.  His heart knows only virtue.  His blade
       defends the helpless.  His word speaks only truth.  His wrath undoes
       the wicked. - the old code of Bowen, last of the dragonslayers

Re: TCP Wrappers

[Corinna Vinschen]

On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 01:28:25PM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote:
> I've whipped up a repackaged version of your -src, that follows the 
> approved conventions.  Also, it uses a shell script to control building, 
> and installs the man pages, header file, has a postinstall script to 
> create /etc/hosts.allow/deny if they dont already exist, etc.
> 
> I'll mail it to you privately, Prentis.

I've removed the package from sourceware in the meantime.  I'll
upload the new one as soon as you've finished it (and I'm awoken :-))

Sorry for the confusion,
Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Developer                                mailto:cygwin@cygwin.com
Red Hat, Inc.

Re: TCP Wrappers

[Charles Wilson]

I've whipped up a repackaged version of your -src, that follows the 
approved conventions.  Also, it uses a shell script to control building, 
and installs the man pages, header file, has a postinstall script to 
create /etc/hosts.allow/deny if they dont already exist, etc.

I'll mail it to you privately, Prentis.

The "hooks" are there to build/install the DLL version, but the 
allow_severity/deny_severity problem I referred to in my earlier message 
has to be fixed first, then you can uncomment the "hooks" in Makefile 
and in the shell script.

--Chuck


Prentis Brooks wrote:

>  I am willing to look into this, it currently does not use libtool, so I
>  have a lot of mods to make that happen, if I understood cgf right.
> 
>  I get cable modem today so I will be able to do more from home now ;)
> 
> On Wed, 3 Apr 2002, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> 
> 
>>On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 09:06:55AM -0500, Prentis Brooks wrote:
>>
>>>Hey Guys, what is the status of the TCP Wrapper upload?  I got an email
>>>from Rob stating that he had problems getting to the files, I fixed the
>>>problem and responded, but no word since.  
>>>
>>I've uploaded it to the contrib area.  I took the freedom to rename
>>the package from "tcp_wrappers_7.6..." to "tcp_wrappers-7.6...", just
>>a dash instead of an underscore in front of the version number.
>>
>>Prepare to announce in a few hours.
>>
>>Btw., IMHO it would be really nice to get libwrap as a DLL in a near
>>future.  I'd like to link OpenSSH dynamically against tcp wrappers...
>>
>>Thanks,
>>Corinna
>>
>>
>>
> 

Re: TCP Wrappers

[Charles Wilson]

Mostly correct.  Unfortnately, libwrap is bad.  It uses an int 
(allow_severity and deny_severity) that are expected to be defined in 
the application (so, tcpd.h says 'extern int allow_severity').

This is okay in a static lib, but not in a DLL.  instead, stuff must be 
changed around so that the library itself defines those variables, and 
exports them to the applications -- AND the applications must NOT 
declare them...which means patches to main() in tcpd, tcpdmatch, 
safe-finger, etc.

And sshd.

--Chuck

Christopher Faylor wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 12:37:25PM -0500, Prentis Brooks wrote:
> 
>>I am willing to look into this, it currently does not use libtool, so I
>>have a lot of mods to make that happen, if I understood cgf right.
>>
> 
> I don't remember saying this.
> 
> It *should* be as simple as saying
> 
> gcc -Wl,--export-all-symbols -shared -o foo.dll -Wl,--out-implib,cygfoo.a *.o
> 
> but I guess it rarely is.
> 
> (I know the above is probably missing some crucial piece or other, I'm
> just vaguely showing how it should work.)
> 
> cgf
> 

Re: TCP Wrappers

[Christopher Faylor]

On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 06:31:43PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 11:24:53AM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote:
>> The -src package is incorrected packaged:
>> 
>> usr/doc/Cygwin/
>> usr/doc/Cygwin/tcp_wrappers_7.6.README
>> usr/src/
>> usr/src/tcp_wrappers_7.6/
>> usr/src/tcp_wrappers_7.6/Banners.Makefile
>> usr/src/tcp_wrappers_7.6/BLURB
>> usr/src/tcp_wrappers_7.6/CHANGES
>> ...
>> 
>> Not good.
>> 
>> Also, the name should be 'tcp_wrappers-7.6-REL...'; the package release 
>> version is missing.
>
>Agh!  I'm sorry.  I'm still not really back from vacation, apparently.
>
>Can I remove the package and keep the directory and setup.exe is still
>happy?

It should be.

cgf

Re: TCP Wrappers

[Christopher Faylor]

On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 12:37:25PM -0500, Prentis Brooks wrote:
> I am willing to look into this, it currently does not use libtool, so I
> have a lot of mods to make that happen, if I understood cgf right.

I don't remember saying this.

It *should* be as simple as saying

gcc -Wl,--export-all-symbols -shared -o foo.dll -Wl,--out-implib,cygfoo.a *.o

but I guess it rarely is.

(I know the above is probably missing some crucial piece or other, I'm
just vaguely showing how it should work.)

cgf

Re: TCP Wrappers

[Prentis Brooks]

 I am willing to look into this, it currently does not use libtool, so I
 have a lot of mods to make that happen, if I understood cgf right.

 I get cable modem today so I will be able to do more from home now ;)

On Wed, 3 Apr 2002, Corinna Vinschen wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 09:06:55AM -0500, Prentis Brooks wrote:
> > Hey Guys, what is the status of the TCP Wrapper upload?  I got an email
> > from Rob stating that he had problems getting to the files, I fixed the
> > problem and responded, but no word since.  
> 
> I've uploaded it to the contrib area.  I took the freedom to rename
> the package from "tcp_wrappers_7.6..." to "tcp_wrappers-7.6...", just
> a dash instead of an underscore in front of the version number.
> 
> Prepare to announce in a few hours.
> 
> Btw., IMHO it would be really nice to get libwrap as a DLL in a near
> future.  I'd like to link OpenSSH dynamically against tcp wrappers...
> 
> Thanks,
> Corinna
> 
> 

-- 
Prentis Brooks	| prentis@aol.net | 703-265-0914 | AIM: PrentisBrooks
Senior System Administrator - Web Infrastructure & Security

       A knight is sworn to valor.  His heart knows only virtue.  His blade
       defends the helpless.  His word speaks only truth.  His wrath undoes
       the wicked. - the old code of Bowen, last of the dragonslayers

Re: TCP Wrappers

[Charles Wilson]

Corinna Vinschen wrote:


>>Also, the name should be 'tcp_wrappers-7.6-REL...'; the package release 
>>version is missing.
>>
> 
> Agh!  I'm sorry.  I'm still not really back from vacation, apparently.
> 
> Can I remove the package and keep the directory and setup.exe is still
> happy?


Sure -- I've added and removed things from 
http://www.neuro.gatech.edu/users/cwilson/cygutils/testing/ all the 
time.  the newly generated setup.ini will just not list tcp_wrappers. 
If a user has already installed tcp_wrappers, then their setup.exe will 
show the package, with 'Keep' action (or uninstall) -- but no reinstall 
or install.   No probs.

--Chuck

Re: TCP Wrappers

[Corinna Vinschen]

On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 11:24:53AM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote:
> The -src package is incorrected packaged:
> 
> usr/doc/Cygwin/
> usr/doc/Cygwin/tcp_wrappers_7.6.README
> usr/src/
> usr/src/tcp_wrappers_7.6/
> usr/src/tcp_wrappers_7.6/Banners.Makefile
> usr/src/tcp_wrappers_7.6/BLURB
> usr/src/tcp_wrappers_7.6/CHANGES
> ...
> 
> Not good.
> 
> Also, the name should be 'tcp_wrappers-7.6-REL...'; the package release 
> version is missing.

Agh!  I'm sorry.  I'm still not really back from vacation, apparently.

Can I remove the package and keep the directory and setup.exe is still
happy?

Corinna

Re: TCP Wrappers

[Charles Wilson]

The -src package is incorrected packaged:

usr/doc/Cygwin/
usr/doc/Cygwin/tcp_wrappers_7.6.README
usr/src/
usr/src/tcp_wrappers_7.6/
usr/src/tcp_wrappers_7.6/Banners.Makefile
usr/src/tcp_wrappers_7.6/BLURB
usr/src/tcp_wrappers_7.6/CHANGES
...

Not good.

Also, the name should be 'tcp_wrappers-7.6-REL...'; the package release 
version is missing.

--Chuck

Corinna Vinschen wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 09:06:55AM -0500, Prentis Brooks wrote:
> 
>>Hey Guys, what is the status of the TCP Wrapper upload?  I got an email
>>from Rob stating that he had problems getting to the files, I fixed the
>>problem and responded, but no word since.  
>>
> 
> I've uploaded it to the contrib area.  I took the freedom to rename
> the package from "tcp_wrappers_7.6..." to "tcp_wrappers-7.6...", just
> a dash instead of an underscore in front of the version number.
> 
> Prepare to announce in a few hours.
> 
> Btw., IMHO it would be really nice to get libwrap as a DLL in a near
> future.  I'd like to link OpenSSH dynamically against tcp wrappers...
> 
> Thanks,
> Corinna
> 
> 

Re: TCP Wrappers

[Corinna Vinschen]

On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 09:06:55AM -0500, Prentis Brooks wrote:
> Hey Guys, what is the status of the TCP Wrapper upload?  I got an email
> from Rob stating that he had problems getting to the files, I fixed the
> problem and responded, but no word since.  

I've uploaded it to the contrib area.  I took the freedom to rename
the package from "tcp_wrappers_7.6..." to "tcp_wrappers-7.6...", just
a dash instead of an underscore in front of the version number.

Prepare to announce in a few hours.

Btw., IMHO it would be really nice to get libwrap as a DLL in a near
future.  I'd like to link OpenSSH dynamically against tcp wrappers...

Thanks,
Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Developer                                mailto:cygwin@cygwin.com
Red Hat, Inc.

TCP Wrappers

[Prentis Brooks]

Hey Guys, what is the status of the TCP Wrapper upload?  I got an email
from Rob stating that he had problems getting to the files, I fixed the
problem and responded, but no word since.  

-- 
Prentis Brooks	| prentis@aol.net | 703-265-0914 | AIM: PrentisBrooks
Senior System Administrator - Web Infrastructure & Security

       A knight is sworn to valor.  His heart knows only virtue.  His blade
       defends the helpless.  His word speaks only truth.  His wrath undoes
       the wicked. - the old code of Bowen, last of the dragonslayers

RE: TCP Wrappers

[Prentis Brooks]

Oddd... I know I put a index page there... one sec...


Nope, I had put another directory in there, full URL should have
been http://www.stonegard.com/cygwin/tcp_wrappers_7.6/  

Sorry, I have added an index page to my cygwin directory now so that
won't happen again ;)


On Sat, 23 Mar 2002, Robert Collins wrote:

> "Directory Listing Denied"
> 
> Rob
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Prentis Brooks [mailto:prentis@aol.net] 
> > Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2002 12:04 AM
> > To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com
> > Subject: TCP Wrappers
> > 
> > 
> > Ok, that was two votes ;)
> > 
> > I have been using the code for several months now, so I am 
> > pretty confident with it.  The packages can be downloaded from 
> > http://www.stonegard.com/cygwin/
> > 
> > Let me know when you have gotten them, or should I get access 
> > to push them up myself somehow?
> > 
> > -- 
> > Prentis Brooks	| prentis@aol.net | 703-265-0914 | AIM: 
> > PrentisBrooks
> > Senior System Administrator - Web Infrastructure & Security
> > 
> >        A knight is sworn to valor.  His heart knows only 
> > virtue.  His blade
> >        defends the helpless.  His word speaks only truth.  
> > His wrath undoes
> >        the wicked. - the old code of Bowen, last of the dragonslayers
> > 
> > 
> 

-- 
Prentis Brooks	| prentis@aol.net | 703-265-0914 | AIM: PrentisBrooks
Senior System Administrator - Web Infrastructure & Security

       A knight is sworn to valor.  His heart knows only virtue.  His blade
       defends the helpless.  His word speaks only truth.  His wrath undoes
       the wicked. - the old code of Bowen, last of the dragonslayers

RE: TCP Wrappers

[Robert Collins]

"Directory Listing Denied"

Rob

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Prentis Brooks [mailto:prentis@aol.net] 
> Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2002 12:04 AM
> To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com
> Subject: TCP Wrappers
> 
> 
> Ok, that was two votes ;)
> 
> I have been using the code for several months now, so I am 
> pretty confident with it.  The packages can be downloaded from 
> http://www.stonegard.com/cygwin/
> 
> Let me know when you have gotten them, or should I get access 
> to push them up myself somehow?
> 
> -- 
> Prentis Brooks	| prentis@aol.net | 703-265-0914 | AIM: 
> PrentisBrooks
> Senior System Administrator - Web Infrastructure & Security
> 
>        A knight is sworn to valor.  His heart knows only 
> virtue.  His blade
>        defends the helpless.  His word speaks only truth.  
> His wrath undoes
>        the wicked. - the old code of Bowen, last of the dragonslayers
> 
> 

RE: TCP Wrappers

[Mark Bradshaw]

I'd love to see it.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Prentis Brooks [mailto:prentis@aol.net] 
> Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 8:04 AM
> To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com
> Subject: TCP Wrappers
> 
> 
> Ok, that was two votes ;)
> 
> I have been using the code for several months now, so I am 
> pretty confident with it.  The packages can be downloaded from 
> http://www.stonegard.com/cygwin/
> 
> Let me know when you have gotten them, or should I get access 
> to push them up myself somehow?
> 
> -- 
> Prentis Brooks	| prentis@aol.net | 703-265-0914 | AIM: 
> PrentisBrooks
> Senior System Administrator - Web Infrastructure & Security
> 
>        A knight is sworn to valor.  His heart knows only 
> virtue.  His blade
>        defends the helpless.  His word speaks only truth.  
> His wrath undoes
>        the wicked. - the old code of Bowen, last of the dragonslayers
> 

TCP Wrappers

[Prentis Brooks]

Ok, that was two votes ;)

I have been using the code for several months now, so I am pretty
confident with it.  The packages can be downloaded from 
http://www.stonegard.com/cygwin/

Let me know when you have gotten them, or should I get access to push
them up myself somehow?

-- 
Prentis Brooks	| prentis@aol.net | 703-265-0914 | AIM: PrentisBrooks
Senior System Administrator - Web Infrastructure & Security

       A knight is sworn to valor.  His heart knows only virtue.  His blade
       defends the helpless.  His word speaks only truth.  His wrath undoes
       the wicked. - the old code of Bowen, last of the dragonslayers

RE: TCP Wrappers

[Robert Collins]

Looks fine to me.

Rob

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christopher Faylor [mailto:cgf@redhat.com] 
> Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 6:53 AM
> To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com
> Subject: Re: TCP Wrappers
> 
> 
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2002 at 02:18:38PM -0500, Prentis Brooks wrote:
> >Hey Chris,
> >	I didn't see any comments on the setup.hint, is what I have
> >compliant?  If so, can we consider the package ready for upload once
> >Robert has time to get it?
> 
> I think the setup.hint looked fine.  I'd like someone else to 
> confirm, though.
> 
> Othere than that, if you've got the votes, someone should upload it.
> 
> cgf
> 

Re: TCP Wrappers

[Christopher Faylor]

On Thu, Mar 21, 2002 at 02:18:38PM -0500, Prentis Brooks wrote:
>Hey Chris,
>	I didn't see any comments on the setup.hint, is what I have 
>compliant?  If so, can we consider the package ready for upload once
>Robert has time to get it?

I think the setup.hint looked fine.  I'd like someone else to confirm,
though.

Othere than that, if you've got the votes, someone should upload it.

cgf

TCP Wrappers

[Prentis Brooks]

Hey Chris,
	I didn't see any comments on the setup.hint, is what I have 
compliant?  If so, can we consider the package ready for upload once
Robert has time to get it?

-- 
Prentis Brooks	| prentis@aol.net | 703-265-0914 | AIM: PrentisBrooks
Senior System Administrator - Web Infrastructure & Security

       A knight is sworn to valor.  His heart knows only virtue.  His blade
       defends the helpless.  His word speaks only truth.  His wrath undoes
       the wicked. - the old code of Bowen, last of the dragonslayers

Re: tcp wrappers

[Charles Wilson]

Prentis Brooks wrote:

> Hrmmm.... I will look into it, I am sure there is some efficiency gained
> from making it a DLL.  Would packages that are built against libwrap
> automatically use the DLL if it is available, or would they need to be
> tweaked as well (ie sshd is compiled such that if libwrap.a is available
> it will use it to make use of host.allow files).


If an import lib is found during the link step (say when building 
sshd.exe), then the linker will use that in preference to a static lib. 
  Import libs are usually named
   /usr/lib/libfoo.dll.a
While static libs are typically
   /usr/lib/libfoo.a
And of course, the DLL is usually
   /usr/bin/cygfoo-N.dll
where 'N' is the interface number (see libtool docs for more info; on 
cygwin, N = c - a  (interface - age)

libtool knows about these rules (on cygwin) when building the library 
(say libtcpwrap) so a properly libtoolized/autoconfiscated tcpwrappers 
package will automagically generate
   /usr/lib/libtcpwrap.dll.a
   /usr/lib/libtcpwrap.a
   /usr/bin/cygtcpwrap-N.dll

When linking a client (say sshd.exe) the linker will use 
libtcpwrap.dll.a, and your sshd.exe will have a runtime dependency on 
cygtcpwrap-N.dll.  (In the past, you had to #define special stuff when 
compiled sshd's .c files; this is no longer necessary thanks to 
auto-import).  It just works (tm).

However, if tcpwrapper is not yet libtoolized (nor autoconfiscated), 
then autoconfiscating and libtoolizing it yourself from "scratch" is a 
pretty big undertaking...

--Chuck

Re: tcp wrappers

[Prentis Brooks]

On Wed, 20 Mar 2002, Christopher Faylor wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 20, 2002 at 06:09:33PM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote:
> >(In the old days, making a DLL required intrusive and exhausting changes 
> >to lots and lots of source files -- __declspec(dllexport) this, 
> >__declspec(dllexport that)... -- but no longer.) With auto-import 
> >binutils, and the libtool-devel package, you merely:
> >
> >rm ldconfig.sh
> >rm ltmain.sh
> >  << edit configure.in and make sure that
> >  it AC_PREREQ's 2.50 or greater >>
> >libtoolize --force -c
> >aclocal ( possibly need to add '-I some-subdir')
> >automake --force -a
> >autoconf
> >
> >And then configure/make as usual -- an poof! DLL AND static lib.
> 
> I don't think that tcp wrappers uses configure or libtool, though.
> Or it didn't the last time I looked at it.
> 
Still doesn't, in fact the rebuild steps from my readme are as follows:

To rebuild this package from the source:
1) cd into /usr/src/tcp_wrappers_7.6
2) run make cygwin
3) strip all exe's
4) mv *.exe /usr/sbin
5) mv libwrap.a /lib

> >Okay, maybe it's not QUITE that easy, but it's close.  You do need to 
> >understand the autotools and maybe read a few man pages, but...
> >
> >Still, this is a maintainer decision. If you don't want to DLLize, that 
> >is your prerogative.  No complaints from me.
> 
> Nor from me.  It was just a suggestion.  I don't think I've ever seen
> a shared version of libwrap, actually.
> 
> cgf
> 
I am still open to looking at what it takes to DLL'ize the lib, and
willing to test it to see what gains we get from it... when I get the
chance ;)

-- 
Prentis Brooks	| prentis@aol.net | 703-265-0914 | AIM: PrentisBrooks
Senior System Administrator - Web Infrastructure & Security

       A knight is sworn to valor.  His heart knows only virtue.  His blade
       defends the helpless.  His word speaks only truth.  His wrath undoes
       the wicked. - the old code of Bowen, last of the dragonslayers

Re: tcp wrappers

[Prentis Brooks]

Hrmmm.... I will look into it, I am sure there is some efficiency gained
from making it a DLL.  Would packages that are built against libwrap
automatically use the DLL if it is available, or would they need to be
tweaked as well (ie sshd is compiled such that if libwrap.a is available
it will use it to make use of host.allow files).

On Wed, 20 Mar 2002, Charles Wilson wrote:

> Prentis Brooks wrote:
> 
> 
> >>Hmm.  I wonder if it would be worthwhile to make the wrapper library a
> >>DLL.
> >>
> > 
> > I would rather we didn't, primarily because the modification to make tcp
> > wrappers work with Cygwin was simplistic.  In fact, at this point the
> > modification is only to the Makefile, plus a line in one another file.  
> > It is my understanding from Mumit Khan that the tcp wrappers author is
> > going to incorporate this patch into the next release of tcp wrap.
> > Taking that into consideration, wouldn't turning the libwrap into a DLL
> > cause a (kind of) branch?
> 
> 
> Not really.  re-libtoolizing the source dir (tcp is libtoolized, I 
> think) using our cygwinized devel version of libtool is a "builder" 
> issue, not really a source code issue.
> 
> (In the old days, making a DLL required intrusive and exhausting changes 
> to lots and lots of source files -- __declspec(dllexport) this, 
> __declspec(dllexport that)... -- but no longer.) With auto-import 
> binutils, and the libtool-devel package, you merely:
> 
> rm ldconfig.sh
> rm ltmain.sh
>    << edit configure.in and make sure that
>    it AC_PREREQ's 2.50 or greater >>
> libtoolize --force -c
> aclocal ( possibly need to add '-I some-subdir')
> automake --force -a
> autoconf
> 
> And then configure/make as usual -- an poof! DLL AND static lib.
> 
> Okay, maybe it's not QUITE that easy, but it's close.  You do need to 
> understand the autotools and maybe read a few man pages, but...
> 
> Still, this is a maintainer decision. If you don't want to DLLize, that 
> is your prerogative.  No complaints from me.
> 
> --Chuck
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Prentis Brooks	| prentis@aol.net | 703-265-0914 | AIM: PrentisBrooks
Senior System Administrator - Web Infrastructure & Security

       A knight is sworn to valor.  His heart knows only virtue.  His blade
       defends the helpless.  His word speaks only truth.  His wrath undoes
       the wicked. - the old code of Bowen, last of the dragonslayers

Re: tcp wrappers

[Christopher Faylor]

On Wed, Mar 20, 2002 at 06:09:33PM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote:
>(In the old days, making a DLL required intrusive and exhausting changes 
>to lots and lots of source files -- __declspec(dllexport) this, 
>__declspec(dllexport that)... -- but no longer.) With auto-import 
>binutils, and the libtool-devel package, you merely:
>
>rm ldconfig.sh
>rm ltmain.sh
>  << edit configure.in and make sure that
>  it AC_PREREQ's 2.50 or greater >>
>libtoolize --force -c
>aclocal ( possibly need to add '-I some-subdir')
>automake --force -a
>autoconf
>
>And then configure/make as usual -- an poof! DLL AND static lib.

I don't think that tcp wrappers uses configure or libtool, though.
Or it didn't the last time I looked at it.

>Okay, maybe it's not QUITE that easy, but it's close.  You do need to 
>understand the autotools and maybe read a few man pages, but...
>
>Still, this is a maintainer decision. If you don't want to DLLize, that 
>is your prerogative.  No complaints from me.

Nor from me.  It was just a suggestion.  I don't think I've ever seen
a shared version of libwrap, actually.

cgf

Re: tcp wrappers

[Charles Wilson]

Prentis Brooks wrote:


>>Hmm.  I wonder if it would be worthwhile to make the wrapper library a
>>DLL.
>>
> 
> I would rather we didn't, primarily because the modification to make tcp
> wrappers work with Cygwin was simplistic.  In fact, at this point the
> modification is only to the Makefile, plus a line in one another file.  
> It is my understanding from Mumit Khan that the tcp wrappers author is
> going to incorporate this patch into the next release of tcp wrap.
> Taking that into consideration, wouldn't turning the libwrap into a DLL
> cause a (kind of) branch?


Not really.  re-libtoolizing the source dir (tcp is libtoolized, I 
think) using our cygwinized devel version of libtool is a "builder" 
issue, not really a source code issue.

(In the old days, making a DLL required intrusive and exhausting changes 
to lots and lots of source files -- __declspec(dllexport) this, 
__declspec(dllexport that)... -- but no longer.) With auto-import 
binutils, and the libtool-devel package, you merely:

rm ldconfig.sh
rm ltmain.sh
   << edit configure.in and make sure that
   it AC_PREREQ's 2.50 or greater >>
libtoolize --force -c
aclocal ( possibly need to add '-I some-subdir')
automake --force -a
autoconf

And then configure/make as usual -- an poof! DLL AND static lib.

Okay, maybe it's not QUITE that easy, but it's close.  You do need to 
understand the autotools and maybe read a few man pages, but...

Still, this is a maintainer decision. If you don't want to DLLize, that 
is your prerogative.  No complaints from me.

--Chuck

Re: tcp wrappers

[Prentis Brooks]

On Wed, 20 Mar 2002, Christopher Faylor wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 20, 2002 at 10:09:57AM -0500, Prentis Brooks wrote:
> >Ok, gang,
> >	I finally got the time to finish up the build so that I had all
> >	the pieces defined in the contributor's document.  It is now
> >	ready for upload.
> 
> Can you repost the setup.hint?  Chuck made some observations on the last
> one that you posted so I'd like to see what you have now.
> 
> Hmm.  I wonder if it would be worthwhile to make the wrapper library a
> DLL.

I would rather we didn't, primarily because the modification to make tcp
wrappers work with Cygwin was simplistic.  In fact, at this point the
modification is only to the Makefile, plus a line in one another file.  
It is my understanding from Mumit Khan that the tcp wrappers author is
going to incorporate this patch into the next release of tcp wrap.
Taking that into consideration, wouldn't turning the libwrap into a DLL
cause a (kind of) branch?

> 
> cgf
> 

-- 
Prentis Brooks	| prentis@aol.net | 703-265-0914 | AIM: PrentisBrooks
Senior System Administrator - Web Infrastructure & Security

       A knight is sworn to valor.  His heart knows only virtue.  His blade
       defends the helpless.  His word speaks only truth.  His wrath undoes
       the wicked. - the old code of Bowen, last of the dragonslayers

Re: tcp wrappers

[Prentis Brooks]

Not a problem, here it is:

# TCP Wrappers
sdesc: "TCP Wrappers, Tool to provide host based access restrictions in
tcp services"
ldesc: "TCP Wrappers, With this package you can monitor and filter
incoming
requests for the SYSTAT, FINGER, FTP, TELNET, RLOGIN, RSH, EXEC, TFTP,
TALK,
and other network services.

The package provides tiny daemon wrapper programs that can be installed
without any changes to existing software or to existing configuration
files.  The wrappers report the name of the client host and of the
requested service; the wrappers do not exchange information with the
client or server applications, and impose no overhead on the actual
conversation between the client and server applications."
category: Net
requires: cygwin

On Wed, 20 Mar 2002, Christopher Faylor wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 20, 2002 at 10:09:57AM -0500, Prentis Brooks wrote:
> >Ok, gang,
> >	I finally got the time to finish up the build so that I had all
> >	the pieces defined in the contributor's document.  It is now
> >	ready for upload.
> 
> Can you repost the setup.hint?  Chuck made some observations on the last
> one that you posted so I'd like to see what you have now.
> 
> Hmm.  I wonder if it would be worthwhile to make the wrapper library a
> DLL.
> 
> cgf
> 

-- 
Prentis Brooks	| prentis@aol.net | 703-265-0914 | AIM: PrentisBrooks
Senior System Administrator - Web Infrastructure & Security

       A knight is sworn to valor.  His heart knows only virtue.  His blade
       defends the helpless.  His word speaks only truth.  His wrath undoes
       the wicked. - the old code of Bowen, last of the dragonslayers

Re: tcp wrappers

[Christopher Faylor]

On Wed, Mar 20, 2002 at 10:09:57AM -0500, Prentis Brooks wrote:
>Ok, gang,
>	I finally got the time to finish up the build so that I had all
>	the pieces defined in the contributor's document.  It is now
>	ready for upload.

Can you repost the setup.hint?  Chuck made some observations on the last
one that you posted so I'd like to see what you have now.

Hmm.  I wonder if it would be worthwhile to make the wrapper library a
DLL.

cgf

tcp wrappers

[Prentis Brooks]

Ok, gang,
	I finally got the time to finish up the build so that I had all
	the pieces defined in the contributor's document.  It is now
	ready for upload.

-- 
Prentis Brooks	| prentis@aol.net | 703-265-0914 | AIM: PrentisBrooks
Senior System Administrator - Web Infrastructure & Security

       A knight is sworn to valor.  His heart knows only virtue.  His blade
       defends the helpless.  His word speaks only truth.  His wrath undoes
       the wicked. - the old code of Bowen, last of the dragonslayers