It failed with
AWS error uploading ‘6gaxphsyhg66mz0a00qghf9nqf7majs2.ls.xz’: Unable to parse ExceptionName: MissingContentLength Message: You must provide the Content-Length HTTP header.
possibly because the istringstream_nocopy introduced in
0d2ebb4373 doesn't supply the seek
method that the AWS library expects. So bring back the old version,
but only for S3BinaryCacheStore.
That is, when build-repeat > 0, and the output of two rounds differ,
then print a warning rather than fail the build. This is primarily to
let Hydra check reproducibility of all packages.
These syscalls are only available in 32bit architectures, but libseccomp
should handle them correctly even if we're on native architectures that
do not have these syscalls.
Signed-off-by: aszlig <aszlig@redmoonstudios.org>
Commands such as "cp -p" also use fsetxattr() in addition to fchown(),
so we need to make sure these syscalls always return successful as well
in order to avoid nasty "Invalid value" errors.
Signed-off-by: aszlig <aszlig@redmoonstudios.org>
Right now it only tests whether seccomp correctly forges the return
value of chown, but the long-term goal is to test the full sandboxing
functionality at some point in the future.
Signed-off-by: aszlig <aszlig@redmoonstudios.org>
What we basically want is a seccomp mode 2 BPF program like this but for
every architecture:
BPF_STMT(BPF_LD+BPF_W+BPF_ABS, offsetof(struct seccomp_data, nr)),
BPF_JUMP(BPF_JMP+BPF_JEQ+BPF_K, __NR_chown, 4, 0),
BPF_JUMP(BPF_JMP+BPF_JEQ+BPF_K, __NR_fchown, 3, 0),
BPF_JUMP(BPF_JMP+BPF_JEQ+BPF_K, __NR_fchownat, 2, 0),
BPF_JUMP(BPF_JMP+BPF_JEQ+BPF_K, __NR_lchown, 1, 0),
BPF_STMT(BPF_RET+BPF_K, SECCOMP_RET_ALLOW),
BPF_STMT(BPF_RET+BPF_K, SECCOMP_RET_ERRNO)
However, on 32 bit architectures we do have chown32, lchown32 and
fchown32, so we'd need to add all the architecture blurb which
libseccomp handles for us.
So we only need to make sure that we add the 32bit seccomp arch while
we're on x86_64 and otherwise we just stay at the native architecture
which was set during seccomp_init(), which more or less replicates
setting 32bit personality during runChild().
The FORCE_SUCCESS() macro here could be a bit less ugly but I think
repeating the seccomp_rule_add() all over the place is way uglier.
Another way would have been to create a vector of syscalls to iterate
over, but that would make error messages uglier because we can either
only print the (libseccomp-internal) syscall number or use
seccomp_syscall_resolve_num_arch() to get the name or even make the
vector a pair number/name, essentially duplicating everything again.
Signed-off-by: aszlig <aszlig@redmoonstudios.org>
Linus Heckemann