similar to: [patch?] dtrace privs in zones ?

Hi all, What is the correct way to give one non-root user the ability to use DTrace with providers running in a process by another user? Through the Web Stack project and some work by Ludovic Champenois and Nasser Nouri, we have done a bit of work to bring together parts of chime, the Web Stack Apache, Ruby and PHP providers, and stuff reused from the DTrace toolkit. It''s in

Dear Experts, My customer is migrating to Solaris 10 from Solaris 8 and have asked me to determine if: With Dtrace, is the user limited to probing only processes they own? The customer has a general security requirement to control user access via management of privileges. Currently, on Solaris 8, LDAP is strongly while RBAC is weakly applied. This will likely change in the Solaris 10 production

We just updated our configuratiosn to have multiple NIS servers, when we initiated a test of client failover, we were disapointed. It seemed that the only way to get a filaover was to /etc/init.d/ypbind restart. It behaves as indicated in http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=5084845 using ypbind-1.17.2-13 on Centos 4.5 / Linux xxxxxxxxxxxx 2.6.9-55.0.12.ELsmp #1 SMP Fri Nov

I see there are some bugzilla links open but not really sure if they conform to the same behaviour what I see. http://www.mail-archive.com/samba at lists.samba.org/msg94854.html https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5315 http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6213298 http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do;jsessionid=991fdfd56a9fcffffffffcbbb8cdf50d6de3?bug_id=4313887

I''m trying to do some userspace tracing on a server-process with the pid provider. My problem is, that the only probes the pid-provider lists for the server-process (to which I attach dtrace with "-p nnnn") are coming from "ld.so.1". There''s not a single one from my modules. If I''m specifying "a.out" (or any of our shared-objects) as the

6727404: intermittent fdisk errors while installing xVM Server guests http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6727404 Is that (at least case #1) the same as OpenSolaris 2008.05 bug 2133 (comment #22)? http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=2133 In some cases the Solaris ata driver is returning a slightly truncated capacity with the DIOCTL_GETGEOM /

I have a huge problem with ZFS pool fragmentation. I started investigating problem about 2 weeks ago http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=34423&tstart=0 I found workaround for now - changing recordsize - but I want better solution. The best solution would be a defragmentator tool, but I can see that it is not easy. When ZFS pool is fragmented then: 1. spa_sync function is

Hi, I''m referring to; http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6977913 It should be in Solaris 11 Express, has anyone tried this? How this is supposed to work? Any documentation available? Yours Markus Kovero -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

On 5/5/10 1:44 AM, Christian Thalinger wrote: > On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 16:19 -0600, Evan Layton wrote: >> Can you try the following and see if it really thinks it''s an EFI lable? >> # dd if=/dev/dsk/c12t0d0s2 of=x skip=512 bs=1 count=10 >> # cat x >> >> This may help us determine if this is another instance of bug 6860320 > > # dd

Hi, I have a problem similar to the previous poster (thread: Virtual network of DomU''s), but apparently not with similar solutions... Situation: - two physical links aggregated to "default0" - dladm create-vlan on default0 with several different vlans - xVM DomU running linux connected to the same vlans when trying to ping the DomU from Dom0, I can see with snoop (in Dom0)

Hi Hope this is the correct forum for my questions. I have 3 x m9000''s and 2 x m5000''s, Which I would like to use ZFS root/boot disks with support for Dynamic Reconfiguration. Sun SPARC Enterprise M8000/M9000 Servers Product Notes for XCP Version 1040 reports this issue as being broken. Sun SPARC Enterprise M8000/M9000 Servers Product Notes for XCP Version 1041 reports this

Hi. This post follows on from: http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-devel/2005-04/msg00185.html And is possibly related to the bug referenced here: http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do;:YfiG?bug_id=4335360 In summary: Java processes are doing odd things. 1) It appears that number values are mysteriously changing. e.g. if you look at the Hashtable error there is no way the

Hi everyone, Please review the information below regarding access to ZFS version information. Let me know if you have questions. Thanks, Cindy CR 6898657: http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6898657 ZFS commands zpool upgrade -v and zfs upgrade -v refer to URLs that are no longer redirected to the correct location after April 30, 2010. Description The

On 13.07.2012, at 21:39, Gabor Greif <gabor.greif at alcatel-lucent.com> wrote: > Benjamin Kramer wrote: >> On 13.07.2012, at 09:46, Gabor Greif <gabor.greif at alcatel-lucent.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> I am in charge of the controlled introduction of clang into >>> our builds at my workplace. Since all our tools must run

We''re running a Cyrus IMAP server on a T2000 under Solaris 10 with about 1 TB of mailboxes on ZFS filesystems. Recently, when under load, we''ve had incidents where IMAP operations became very slow. The general symptoms are that the number of imapd, pop3d, and lmtpd processes increases, the CPU load average increases, but the ZFS I/O bandwidth decreases. At the same time, ZFS

Benjamin Kramer wrote: > On 13.07.2012, at 09:46, Gabor Greif <gabor.greif at alcatel-lucent.com> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> I am in charge of the controlled introduction of clang into >> our builds at my workplace. Since all our tools must run from >> a ClearCase view for automatic dependency tracking, we have been >> biten by a Linux bug, and

Hi. While submitting SDR-0149 on ZFS bug I encountered problem with format utility. This is v240 with snv_29 with internal disks. On s0 slices there is zfs pool (which is not imported). I did unload zfs modules then moved zfs driver and run format. Now format quits just because there''s no zfs module (and not even one zfs pool is imported). It shouldn''t behave that

While thinking about ZFS as the next generation filesystem without limits I am wondering if the real world is ready for this kind of incredible technology ... I''m actually speaking of hardware :) ZFS can handle a lot of devices. Once in the import bug (http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6761786) is fixed it should be able to handle a lot of disks. I want to

Chandler Carruth wrote: > On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 1:40 PM, Benjamin Kramer <benny.kra at gmail.com > <mailto:benny.kra at gmail.com>> wrote: > > > On 13.07.2012, at 21:39, Gabor Greif <gabor.greif at alcatel-lucent.com > <mailto:gabor.greif at alcatel-lucent.com>> wrote: > > > Benjamin Kramer wrote: > >> On 13.07.2012,

On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 1:40 PM, Benjamin Kramer <benny.kra at gmail.com>wrote: > > On 13.07.2012, at 21:39, Gabor Greif <gabor.greif at alcatel-lucent.com> > wrote: > > > Benjamin Kramer wrote: > >> On 13.07.2012, at 09:46, Gabor Greif <gabor.greif at alcatel-lucent.com> > wrote: > >> > >>> Hi all, > >>> >