similar to: [Bug 1482] New: SOCKS4A support

This provides SOCKS4A support, which allows a SOCKS4 client to provide a host name instead of an IP address. It indicates that it's doing so by using a known-invalid IP address 0.0.0.x (where x != 0), and then appending the NUL-terminated hostname to the connection request. Although we check for the terminating NUL manually and the 'fatal(len %d > have %d)' should never happen, the

I love SSH's ability to dynamically forward ports using SOCKS (either -D or DynamicForward) (ie "ssh -D 1081 private.mine.net"). But the thing that has caused me some pain, is that only SOCKS4 is supported. The SOCKS4 proxy specification does not permit hostnames, but only IP addresses. This isn't much of a problem if the target host is a public Internet host or otherwise DNS

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1329 Summary: stale control sockets prevent connection. Product: Portable OpenSSH Version: 4.6p1 Platform: Other OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: ssh AssignedTo: bitbucket at mindrot.org ReportedBy: dwmw2 at

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1328 Summary: ControlClient uses wrong $DISPLAY. Product: Portable OpenSSH Version: 4.6p1 Platform: Other OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: ssh AssignedTo: bitbucket at mindrot.org ReportedBy: dwmw2 at

If we''ve abandoned the idea of putting the number of redundant blocks into the top bits of the type bitmask (and I hope we have), then we''re fairly much there. Current code is at: git://, http://git.infradead.org/users/dwmw2/btrfs-raid56.git git://, http://git.infradead.org/users/dwmw2/btrfs-progs-raid56.git We have recovery working, as well as both full-stripe writes

Quick response to a detail, I'll respond to more of this when i have more time. On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 1:55 PM David Woodhouse <dwmw2 at infradead.org> wrote: > OK... which __x86_indirect_thunk* symbols *are* being used by Clang in > 32-bit mode? __x86_indirect_thunk __x86_indirect_thunk_eax __x86_indirect_thunk_ecx __x86_indirect_thunk_edx > I've added

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1349 Summary: race condition with ControlMaster=auto Product: Portable OpenSSH Version: 4.6p1 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: ssh AssignedTo: bitbucket at mindrot.org ReportedBy: dot at dotat.at

On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 4:23 PM Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 4:03 PM David Woodhouse <dwmw2 at infradead.org> > wrote: > >> On Thu, 2018-02-01 at 10:10 +0100, Hans Wennborg via llvm-dev wrote: >> > >> > I saw the retpoline mitigation landed in r323155. Are we ready to >> > merge this to 6.0, or are

On Wed, 2018-02-07 at 22:00 +0000, Chandler Carruth wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 1:55 PM David Woodhouse <dwmw2 at infradead.org> > wrote: > > OK... which __x86_indirect_thunk* symbols *are* being used by Clang > > in > > 32-bit mode? > __x86_indirect_thunk > __x86_indirect_thunk_eax > __x86_indirect_thunk_ecx > __x86_indirect_thunk_edx Thanks.

http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17377 Summary: NV50 failure on MacBook Pro. Product: xorg Version: git Platform: Other OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: medium Component: Driver/nouveau AssignedTo: nouveau at lists.freedesktop.org ReportedBy: dwmw2 at

On Tue, 2014-01-14 at 22:59 -0800, Craig Topper wrote: > I started trying to fix this tonight but it's pretty nasty to fix. > I'll try to make another go at it later this week. Much of it seems fixed already; what's left to fix? The segment prefix override? Does that mean we get to fix disassembly of '0x65 0xa4' while we're at it? (Although we can't even

On Mon, 2013-12-16 at 19:46 +0000, Eric Christopher wrote: > > I'm catching up on email at the moment so I don't know if you've done > this, but patches should go to llvm-commits for review if you wouldn't > mind. I have done so. I've since worked out that the signed 16-bit relocation is probably entirely pointless and I should just drop the assert() from the

Here's a brief update on the current state of 16-bit x86 support... The assembler has support for the .code16 directive and can happily output 16-bit code. In pending patches¹ I have also added an i386-*-*-code16 triple and fixed the disassembler to support 16-bit mode (which was previously present, but could not be invoked and was fairly broken). And added a '-m16' option to clang.

On 02/02/2018 04:27 PM, Chandler Carruth wrote: > On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 4:23 PM Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com <mailto:chandlerc at google.com>> wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 4:03 PM David Woodhouse <dwmw2 at infradead.org <mailto:dwmw2 at infradead.org>> wrote: > > On Thu, 2018-02-01 at 10:10 +0100, Hans Wennborg via llvm-dev

On Mon, 2014-01-06 at 14:23 -0800, Jim Grosbach wrote: > Hi David, > > AFAIK, the answer is basically “because it’s always been that way.” I > seem to recall there were some things that were different (data layout > string and such), but that could also be parameterized if it hasn’t > been already by the recent refactorings, I suppose. It is *all* now parameterized. The classes

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=983 Damien Miller <djm at mindrot.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |1930 --- Comment #34 from Damien Miller <djm at mindrot.org> 2011-09-06 10:34:24 EST --- Retarget unresolved

On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 4:03 PM David Woodhouse <dwmw2 at infradead.org> wrote: > On Thu, 2018-02-01 at 10:10 +0100, Hans Wennborg via llvm-dev wrote: > > > > I saw the retpoline mitigation landed in r323155. Are we ready to > > merge this to 6.0, or are there any open issues that we're waiting > > for? Also, were there any followups I should know about? Also,

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1331 Summary: ControlClient escape sequences non-functional Product: Portable OpenSSH Version: 4.6p1 Platform: Other OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: ssh AssignedTo: bitbucket at mindrot.org ReportedBy: dwmw2

I believe I have now fixed the 0x64 0xa1 0x00 0x00 0x00 0x00 bug in r199364. On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Craig Topper <craig.topper at gmail.com>wrote: > To fix it we need to change offset8/offset16/etc to have two suboperands > and update the printer to understand that. Also update the disassembler to > add the segment to the MCInst when its creating it. When I did these

On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 2:56 PM David Woodhouse <dwmw2 at infradead.org> wrote: > On Tue, 2018-02-06 at 22:08 +0000, Chandler Carruth wrote: > > So, I was waiting to hear a definitive response on whether using aliases > is hard, and didn't see one here, which is why I haven't responded further. > > However, a colleauge pointed me at an LKML thread where it seems