Fixed a bug in initialization of 'base64DecodeChars' variable.
Currently decoder do not fail on invalid Base64 strings.
Added test-case to verify the fix.
Also have made 'base64DecodeChars' to be computed at compile time.
And added a test case to encode/decode string with non-printable charactes.
This ensures any started processes can't write to /nix/store (except
during builds). This partially reverts 01d07b1e, which happened because
of #2646.
The problem was only happening after nix downloads anything, causing
me to suspect the download thread. The problem turns out to be:
"A process can't join a new mount namespace if it is sharing
filesystem-related attributes with another process", in this case this
process is the curl thread.
Ideally, we might kill it before spawning the shell process, but it's
inside a static variable in the getFileTransfer() function. So
instead, stop it from sharing FS state using unshare(). A strategy
such as the one from #5057 (single-threaded chroot helper binary) is
also very much on the table.
Fixes#4337.
The garbage collector no longer blocks other processes from
adding/building store paths or adding GC roots. To prevent the
collector from deleting store paths just added by another process,
processes need to connect to the garbage collector via a Unix domain
socket to register new temporary roots.
9c766a40cb broke logging from the
daemon, because commonChildInit is called when starting the build hook
in a vfork, so it ends up resetting the parent's logger. So don't
vfork.
It might be best to get rid of vfork altogether, but that may cause
problems, e.g. when we call an external program like git from the
evaluator.
Previously, despite having a boolean that tracked initialization, the
decode characters have been "calculated" every single time a base64
string was being decoded.
With this change we only initialize the decode array once in a
thread-safe manner.
Otherwise I get a compiler error when building for NetBSD:
src/libutil/util.cc: In function 'void nix::_deletePath(const Path&, uint64_t&)':
src/libutil/util.cc:438:17: error: base operand of '->' is not a pointer
438 | AutoCloseFD dirfd(open(dir.c_str(), O_RDONLY));
| ^~~~~
src/libutil/util.cc:439:10: error: 'dirfd' was not declared in this scope
439 | if (!dirfd) {
| ^~~~~
src/libutil/util.cc:444:17: error: 'dirfd' was not declared in this scope
444 | _deletePath(dirfd.get(), path, bytesFreed);
| ^~~~~
When you have a symlink like:
/tmp -> ./private/tmp
you need to resolve ./private/tmp relative to /tmp’s dir: ‘/’. Unlike
any other path output by dirOf, / ends with a slash. We don’t want
trailing slashes here since we will append another slash in the next
comoponent, so clear s like we would if it was a symlink to an absoute
path.
This should fix at least part of the issue in
https://github.com/NixOS/nix/issues/4822, will need confirmation that
it actually fixes the problem to close though.
Introduced in f3f228700a.
If there were many top-level goals (which are not destroyed until the
very end), commands like
$ nix copy --to 'ssh://localhost?remote-store=/tmp/nix' \
/run/current-system --no-check-sigs --substitute-on-destination
could fail with "Too many open files". So now we do some explicit
cleanup from amDone(). It would be cleaner to separate goals from
their temporary internal state, but that would be a bigger refactor.
I tested a trivial program that called kill(-1, SIGKILL), which was
run as the only process for an unpriveleged user, on Linux and
FreeBSD. On Linux, kill reported success, while on FreeBSD it failed
with EPERM.
POSIX says:
> If pid is -1, sig shall be sent to all processes (excluding an
> unspecified set of system processes) for which the process has
> permission to send that signal.
and
> The kill() function is successful if the process has permission to
> send sig to any of the processes specified by pid. If kill() fails,
> no signal shall be sent.
and
> [EPERM]
> The process does not have permission to send the signal to any
> receiving process.
My reading of this is that kill(-1, ...) may fail with EPERM when
there are no other processes to kill (since the current process is
ignored). Since kill(-1, ...) only attempts to kill processes the
user has permission to kill, it can't mean that we tried to do
something we didn't have permission to kill, so it should be fine to
interpret EPERM the same as success here for any POSIX-compliant
system.
This fixes an issue that Mic92 encountered[1] when he tried to review a
Nixpkgs PR on FreeBSD.
[1]: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/81459#issuecomment-606073668
Yorick
Alyssa Ross