I've got long uptime here and dont want to ruin it..
Is this bug fixed in 34pre8? I've got the 34pre8 kernel compiled and in
place so If I do reboot I'm coming back up with that..
On Sat, 18 Apr 1998, ADAM Sulmicki wrote:
> -> Date: Sat, 18 Apr 1998 12:22:09 -0400 (EDT)
> -> From: Jon Lewis <jlewis@inorganic5.fdt.net>
> ->
> -> Am I correct in assuming this is the recently fixed 2.0.33
> -> off-by-one IP header bug?
> ->
> ->Yep, thats the signature OOPS, apply the fix and reboot ;-)
>
> Not even that :-), I don't think bug-fix is enough of cause to justify
> rebooting my box which has already 80 days of up time. You reboot windooze
> boxes not linux boxes.
>
> This fix is so trival (either David's or Allan's) that it shouldn't
> be hard to come up with a binary patch to apply it to running
> kernel (am I right?)
>
> It reminds me old days when I would run games under Borland's debugger
> and 'patch' it so that I would win them in 15 min or so.
>
> Anyways, anyone cares to comment how it could be done.
>
> As I see the biggest problem is that the patched code is one operand (add)
> longer than the old one (Allan's patch).. I think it is around 15 bytes.
> So it may be necessary to put it in some other place in memory and
> in original place put undonditional jump.
>
> Also, I'm not sure how to get opimized diff of the old code since
> patch/diff operate on source not binary filse, the only util I
> saw was XDELTA, but it is still not exactly what I want.
>
> Once I get the string to search in running kernel and the string
> to replace with, how I would do that? /proc/kcore ? any utils to do
> that?
>
> Comments
>
> -Adam
> Hoping to avoid to have reboot his box.
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu