From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4233 invoked by alias); 30 Apr 2012 19:16:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 4223 invoked by uid 22791); 30 Apr 2012 19:16:21 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE,TW_BF,TW_MJ X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-wg0-f43.google.com (HELO mail-wg0-f43.google.com) (74.125.82.43) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 30 Apr 2012 19:16:08 +0000 Received: by wgbdr1 with SMTP id dr1so2512595wgb.12 for ; Mon, 30 Apr 2012 12:16:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-originating-ip:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:x-gm-message-state; bh=dpkeQ5q56/7++/BAtWdXVyp8K+XH+aeJ20rGXmMYwBg=; b=J3kp23X9MJ60c5a3TEyNMFHa1pbvXkGtYWcz2j3QPXG0PAMmP5Q1bq/OAV55lu0ybS mtBna4mmep/aEMmqL/XOVoN4BKQEOZET6FSagw6O+tb0veOOw9XjRQBQQ5lrDIy62jrr U6PhDESOw9K3xKc90d/zlP8V+GTSSlSXfgS5Gpg2RZ8IjLUAQSjMCAsas5iTT+fXHB+Y e6hVEKRvwIDbewEpgZkC3e4TnrIIijT0LJiA05y/VhbLXfXnBMQSVzQauSxrz1uT+qIP 6nk3TNg0/s6gNnPZtqqdSg7R4ooXSVD+9s2jdrbOit9CX5BL2Ga2dCxwDo14wyH1u/d0 KWvQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.180.101.65 with SMTP id fe1mr31242114wib.21.1335813367093; Mon, 30 Apr 2012 12:16:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.223.71.150 with HTTP; Mon, 30 Apr 2012 12:16:06 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4F9E4E13.1060701@redhat.com> References: <4F97BF9E.6070103@redhat.com> <4F991CA5.8070503@redhat.com> <4F9E4E13.1060701@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2012 19:16:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: libffi & fork From: Anthony Green To: Andrew Haley Cc: libffi-discuss@sourceware.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlA8FjcZV6oGPevHhY8y8bSJp+rdVtngVcbySbDnJqWoFr7CZpbtpgQ/lxjnzlaRbSoeQFy X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact libffi-discuss-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libffi-discuss-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2012/txt/msg00192.txt.bz2 On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 4:32 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: >> Andrew - it would be nice if we could upgrade RHEL's libffi to a >> non-ABI breaking 3.0.10. =A0If, however, it makes more sense to >> cherry-pick patches since 3.0.5, I can see some nice ones from mjw and >> jakub back in 2010, and there are likely more. =A0If you think we should >> open an RFE I can propose some specific patches for consideration. >> There may only be 4 or 5 and they are all pretty obvious. > > I think we should do that. Hmm.. check out this bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=3D772657 If our selinux state detection code really is this fragile, maybe we should link against libselinux and use is_selinux_enabled() as suggested in comment 4. AG