Search Results

Search found 17 results on 1 pages for 'siegex'.

Page 1/1 | 1 

• Subversion 1.6 + SASL : Only works with plaintext 'userPassword'?

  - by SiegeX

  I'm attempting to setup svnserve with SASL support on my Slackware 13.1 server and after some trial and error I'm able to get it to work with the configuration listed below: svnserve.conf [general] anon-access = read auth-access = write realm = myrepo [sasl] use-sasl = true min-encryption = 128 max-encryption = 256 /etc/sasl2/svn.conf pwcheck_method: auxprop auxprop_plugin: sasldb sasldb_path: /etc/sasl2/my_sasldb mech_list: DIGEST-MD5 sasldb users $ sasldblistusers2 -f /etc/sasl2/my_sasldb test@myrepo: cmusaslsecretOTP test@myrepo: userPassword You'll notice that the output of sasldblistusers2 shows my test user as having both an encrypted cmusaslsecretOTP password as well as a plain text userPassword passwd. i.e., if I were to run strings /etc/sasl2/my_sasldb I would see the test users' password in plaintext. These two password entries were created with the following subversion book recommended command: saslpasswd2 -c -f /etc/sasl2/my_sasldb -u myrepo test After reading man saslpasswd2 I see the following option: -n Don't set the plaintext userPassword property for the user. Only mechanism-specific secrets will be set (e.g. OTP, SRP) This is exactly what I want to do, suppress the plain text password and only use the mechanism-specific secret (OTP in my case). So I clear out /etc/sasl2/my_sasldb and rerun saslpasswd2 as: saslpasswd2 -n -c -f /etc/sasl2/my_sasldb -u myrepo test I then follow it up with a sasldblistusers2 and I see: $ sasldblistusers2 -f /etc/sasl2/my_sasldb test@myrepo: cmusaslsecretOTP Perfect! I think, now I have only encrypted passwords.... only neither the Linux svn client nor the Windows TortoiseSVN client can connect to my repo anymore. They both present me with the user/pass challenge but that's as far as I get. TLDR So, what is the point of SVN supporting SASL if my sasldb must store its passwords in plaintext to work?

  Read the article

• Blank white desktop icons on new Windows 7 install

  - by SiegeX

  I just did a fresh install of Windows 7 professional on my father's Toshiba Satellite laptop and everything went smoothly except for the fact that certain desktop shortcuts appear as a blank white page. I've tried: going in and changing the icon to many different things reloading the icon cache by deleting the IconCache.db file uninstalling his Free AVG as he heard the virus scanner might be preventing it (it wasn't and he put it back.) The one thing these icons have in common is that they are shortcuts to some very old DOS executables. One of them is Word Star 2000 to give you an idea. Does anybody have any other suggestions besides what we've tried?

  Read the article

• 5v PCI to PCI-X or PCIe adapter?

  - by SiegeX

  We unfortunately have a very expensive ($10K) full-length 5 volt PCI card that we would like to use in the same system as another expensive PCI-X card. As luck would have it, it seems that PCI-X is not backwards compatible with 5v PCI cards. It would be a real shame to have to order a whole new server just to accommodate these two cards together. Does there exist any internal converter/adapter that will allow one to place a full-length 5v PCI card into either a PCI-X or PCIe slot? I've found an external expansion box that suits our needs but it's 1) External and 2) $1100. The only internal adapters I've been able to find go from Low-profile PCI - PCIe; nothing that seems to support full-height, full-length PCI cards.

  Read the article

• How to upgrade a 1.4.3 TortoiseSVN-created repository to 1.6.x?

  - by SiegeX

  A few years ago, TortoiseSVN 1.4.3 was deployed to our software development team and we are now looking at upgrading the client to the latest 1.6.x version. I had hoped this upgrade would be transparent with the additional features and modifications being client-side. For the most part, this was true except for a very important feature -- merging. When I try to merge a feature branch back into truck I get a show-stopping "Merge tracking not supported error." Here are some facts worth noting: When the repo was first created (before I was on board), it was created via the TortoiseSVN client itself. We do not have a 'svn server daemon' per se, rather the repository folders/database resides on a share folder that is accessible from our workstation machines via file:///. This was actually an eye opener for me, I had always thought there was some SVN server daemon we were talking to. We do not have any access to the underlying machine hosting the SVN share other than the ability to read/write to the share itself. I don't even know what OS the machine is running on. This share server was chosen because its drives are backed up nightly by our IT group. In all honesty, we really don't need the merge tracking feature although it would be nice to have. For the time being it would be sufficient to be able to use a 1.6.x TortoiseSVN client on the 1.4.3 repository and have it merge (sans tracking) without error. So now the question becomes, how does one upgrade a client-created 1.4.3 repo to a 1.6.x compatible version without access to the underlying machine the repo resides on? I was hoping the TortoiseSVN client itself had the ability to do this but that does not appear to be the case. Will I be forced to copy the entire repo over to my local drive, run some svn commands to upgrade the repo locally then copy the repo back to the share point? If so, will doing this break any compatibility with the the 1.4.3 clients in case we cant upgrade them all at the same time? Thanks for the help.

  Read the article

• How to upgrade a 1.4.3 TortoiseSVN-created repository to 1.6.x?

  - by SiegeX

  A few years ago, TortoiseSVN 1.4.3 was deployed to our software development team and we are now looking at upgrading the client to the latest 1.6.x version. I had hoped this upgrade would be transparent with the additional features and modifications being client-side. For the most part, this was true except for a very important feature -- merging. When I try to merge a feature branch back into truck I get a show-stopping "Merge tracking not supported error." Here are some facts worth noting: When the repo was first created (before I was on board), it was created via the TortoiseSVN client itself. We do not have a 'svn server daemon' per se, rather the repository folders/database resides on a share folder that is accessible from our workstation machines via file:///. This was actually an eye opener for me, I had always thought there was some SVN server daemon we were talking to. We do not have any access to the underlying machine hosting the SVN share other than the ability to read/write to the share itself. I don't even know what OS the machine is running on. This share server was chosen because its drives are backed up nightly by our IT group. In all honesty, we really don't need the merge tracking feature although it would be nice to have. For the time being it would be sufficient to be able to use a 1.6.x TortoiseSVN client on the 1.4.3 repository and have it merge (sans tracking) without error. So now the question becomes, how does one upgrade a client-created 1.4.3 repo to a 1.6.x compatible version without access to the underlying machine the repo resides on? I was hoping the TortoiseSVN client itself had the ability to do this but that does not appear to be the case. Will I be forced to copy the entire repo over to my local drive, run some svn commands to upgrade the repo locally then copy the repo back to the share point? If so, will doing this break any compatibility with the the 1.4.3 clients in case we cant upgrade them all at the same time? Thanks for the help.

  Read the article

• How to best convert a fully encrypted drive into a Virtual Machine?

  - by SiegeX

  I have a Windows XP laptop that uses GuardianEdge's Encryption Plus to fully encrypt the drive from bootup. What I would like to do is install a much larger (unencrypted) hard drive with Windows 7 on it and turn this fully encrypted drive into a Virtual Machine that can be ran in either Virtualbox or VMWare on the Windows 7 host. I've read many howto's that talk about using an imaging tool like Acronis True Image to image the drive then passing that through VMWare's VCenter Converter to turn it into a format that VMWare can understand. Unfortunately this seems to all far apart when you are dealing with a fully encrypted drive because Acronis cannot recognize the file system and attempts to do a sector-by-sector copy of the entire hard drive. This is extremely wasteful since the drive is 120GB but the file system is only using 10GB of that. Even if I were OK with going with an inefficient 120GB sector-by-sector copy, I'm not sure that this would even work under VMWare or Virtualbox. Unfortunately, the Guardian Edge boot-time login comes up only after the hard drive has been selected as the boot device; preventing me from being able to decrypt the drive prior to booting an Acronis True Image CD so that it can recognize the underlying file system. I'm sure I'm not the first person to want to do this but I am having a heck of a time finding solutions to this problem. All suggested/answers welcomed. Thanks

  Read the article

• What is C's analogy to LabVIEW's Event Structure?

  - by SiegeX

  One programming construct I use quite a bit in LabVIEW is the Event Structure. This gives me the benefit of not having to needlessly waste CPU cycles via polling but only perform actions when an event I'm interested in is generated. As an experienced LabVIEW programmer with a decent understanding of C, I'm curious how one would go about emulating LabVIEW's event structure in C; preferably under Linux. A small code sample (like the one in the link above) illustrating how this might be done would be much appreciated. Also, if there already exists 3rd party libraries (for Linux) to add this event framework to C, that would be nice to know as well. Thanks.

  Read the article

• Recommendations for 'C' Project architecture guidlines?

  - by SiegeX

  Now that I got my head wrapped around the 'C' language to a point where I feel proficient enough to write clean code, I'd like to focus my attention on project architecture guidelines. I'm looking for a good resource that coves the following topics: How to create an interface that promotes code maintainability and is extensible for future upgrades. Library creation guidelines. Example, when should I consider using static vs dynamic libraries. How to properly design an ABI to cope with either one. Header files: what to partition out and when. Examples on when to use 1:1 vs 1:many .h to .c Anything you feel I missed but is important when attempting to architect a new C project. Ideally, I'd like to see some example projects ranging from small to large and see how the architecture changes depending on project size, function or customer. What resource(s) would you recommend for such topics? Thanks

  Read the article

• How does the last integer promotion rule ever get applied in C?

  - by SiegeX

  6.3.1.8p1: Otherwise, the integer promotions are performed on both operands. Then the following rules are applied to the promoted operands: If both operands have the same type, then no further conversion is needed. Otherwise, if both operands have signed integer types or both have unsigned integer types, the operand with the type of lesser integer conversion rank is converted to the type of the operand with greater rank. Otherwise, if the operand that has unsigned integer type has rank greater or equal to the rank of the type of the other operand, then the operand with signed integer type is converted to the type of the operand with unsigned integer type. Otherwise, if the type of the operand with signed integer type can represent all of the values of the type of the operand with unsigned integer type, then the operand with unsigned integer type is converted to the type of the operand with signed integer type. Otherwise, both operands are converted to the unsigned integer type corresponding to the type of the operand with signed integer type. For the bolded rule to be applied it would seem to imply you need to have have an unsigned interger type who's rank is less than the signed integer type and the signed integer type cannot hold all the values of the unsigned integer type. Is there a real world example of such a case or is this statement serving as a catch-all to cover all possible permutations?

  Read the article

• Recommendations for 'C' Project architecture guidelines?

  - by SiegeX

  Now that I got my head wrapped around the 'C' language to a point where I feel proficient enough to write clean code, I'd like to focus my attention on project architecture guidelines. I'm looking for a good resource that coves the following topics: How to create an interface that promotes code maintainability and is extensible for future upgrades. Library creation guidelines. Example, when should I consider using static vs dynamic libraries. How to properly design an ABI to cope with either one. Header files: what to partition out and when. Examples on when to use 1:1 vs 1:many .h to .c Anything you feel I missed but is important when attempting to architect a new C project. Ideally, I'd like to see some example projects ranging from small to large and see how the architecture changes depending on project size, function or customer. What resource(s) would you recommend for such topics?

  Read the article

• How to upgrade a 1.4.3 TortoiseSVN created repository to 1.6.x?

  - by SiegeX

  A few years ago we deployed TortoiseSVN 1.4.3 to our software development team and we used this client to create a repository on a share point. We are now looking at upgrading to the latest 1.6.x version of TortoiseSVN. I had hoped this would be transparent as the additional features and modifications will all be client-side. For the most part this is true except for a very important feature -- merging. When I try to merge a feature branch back into truck I get a "Merge tracking not supported error." So now the question becomes, how does one upgrade a 1.4.3 TortoiseSVN created repo to be compatible with the latest 1.6.x version of TortoiseSVN? As a follow up question, if we were to successfully upgrade the repo such that the 1.6.x client works flawlessly, will we still be backwards compatible with a 1.4.x client?

  Read the article

• Can I mix static and shared-object libraries when linking?

  - by SiegeX

  I have a C project that produces ten executables, all of which I would like to be statically linked. The problem I am facing is that one of these executables uses a 3rd-party library of which only the shared-object version is available. If I pass the -static flag to gcc, ld will error saying it can't find the library in question (I presume it's looking for the .a version) and the executable will not be built. Ideally, I would like to be able to tell 'ld' to statically link as much as it can and fail over to the shared object library if a static library cannot be found. In the interium I tried something like gcc -static -lib1 -lib2 -shared -lib3rdparty foo.c -o foo.exe in hopes that 'ld' would statically link in lib1 and lib2 but only have a run-time dependence on lib3rdparty. Unfortunatly, this did not work as I intended; instead the -shared flag overwrote the -static flag and everything was compiled as shared-objects. Is statically linking an all-or-nothing deal, or is there some way I can mix and match?

  Read the article

• Eclipse CDT -- How to map Linux path's to Windows paths?

  - by SiegeX

  We have a C-code project written for a Linux environment but we also want the ability to view and edit the code on Eclipse for Windows and have the headers be resolved. The problem we are facing is that a lot of the headers are included with absolute paths in the Linux format such as: #include /path/to/custom/header.h What I would like to be able to do is have Eclipse CDT map /path/to/custom/ to C:\path\to\custom. Is this possible?

  Read the article

• Division by zero: Undefined Behavior or Implementation Defined in C and/or C++ ?

  - by SiegeX

  Regarding division by zero, the standards say: C99 6.5.5p5 - The result of the / operator is the quotient from the division of the first operand by the second; the result of the % operator is the remainder. In both operations, if the value of the second operand is zero, the behavior is undefined. C++03 5.6.4 - The binary / operator yields the quotient, and the binary % operator yields the remainder from the division of the first expression by the second. If the second operand of / or % is zero the behavior is undefined. If we were to take the above paragraphs at face value, the answer is clearly Undefined Behavior for both languages. However, if we look further down in the C99 standard we see the following paragraph which appears to be contradictory(1): C99 7.12p4 - The macro INFINITY expands to a constant expression of type float representing positive or unsigned infinity, if available; Do the standards have some sort of golden rule where Undefined Behavior cannot be superseded by a (potentially) contradictory statement? Barring that, I don't think it's unreasonable to conclude that if your implementation defines the INFINITY macro, division by zero is defined to be such. However, if your implementation does not define such a macro, the behavior is Undefined. I'm curious what the consensus on this matter for each of the two languages. Would the answer change if we are talking about integer division int i = 1 / 0 versus floating point division float i = 1.0 / 0.0 ? Note (1) The C++03 standard talks about the library which includes the INFINITY macro.

  Read the article

• What are the implications of having an "implicit declaration of function" warning in C?

  - by SiegeX

  As the question states, what exactly are the implications of having the 'implicit declaration of function' warning? We just cranked up the warning flags on gcc and found quite a few instances of these warnings and I'm curious what type of problems this may have caused prior to fixing them? Also, why is this a warning and not an error. How is gcc even able to successfully link this executable? As you can see in the example below, the executable functions as expected. Take the following two files for example: file1.c #include <stdio.h> int main(void) { funcA(); return 0; } file2.c #include <stdio.h> void funcA(void) { puts("hello world"); } Compile & Output $ gcc -Wall -Wextra -c file1.c file2.c file1.c: In function 'main': file1.c:3: warning: implicit declaration of function 'funcA' $ gcc -Wall -Wextra file1.o file2.o -o test.exe $ ./test.exe hello world

  Read the article

• How to catch unintentional function interpositioning?

  - by SiegeX

  Reading through my book Expert C Programming, I came across the chapter on function interpositioning and how it can lead to some serious hard to find bugs if done unintentionally. The example given in the book is the following: my_source.c mktemp() { ... } main() { mktemp(); getwd(); } libc mktemp(){ ... } getwd(){ ...; mktemp(); ... } According to the book, what happens in main() is that mktemp() (a standard C library function) is interposed by the implementation in my_source.c. Although having main() call my implementation of mktemp() is intended behavior, having getwd() (another C library function) also call my implementation of mktemp() is not. Apparently, this example was a real life bug that existed in SunOS 4.0.3's version of lpr. The book goes on to explain the fix was to add the keyword static to the definition of mktemp() in my_source.c; although changing the name altogether should have fixed this problem as well. This chapter leaves me with some unresolved questions that I hope you guys could answer: Does GCC have a way to warn about function interposition? We certainly don't ever intend on this happening and I'd like to know about it if it does. Should our software group adopt the practice of putting the keyword static in front of all functions that we don't want to be exposed? Can interposition happen with functions introduced by static libraries? Thanks for the help. EDIT I should note that my question is not just aimed at interposing over standard C library functions, but also functions contained in other libraries, perhaps 3rd party, perhaps ones created in-house. Essentially, I want to catch any instance of interpositioning regardless of where the interposed function resides.

  Read the article

• How to catch unintentional function interpositioning with GCC?

  - by SiegeX

  Reading through my book Expert C Programming, I came across the chapter on function interpositioning and how it can lead to some serious hard to find bugs if done unintentionally. The example given in the book is the following: my_source.c mktemp() { ... } main() { mktemp(); getwd(); } libc mktemp(){ ... } getwd(){ ...; mktemp(); ... } According to the book, what happens in main() is that mktemp() (a standard C library function) is interposed by the implementation in my_source.c. Although having main() call my implementation of mktemp() is intended behavior, having getwd() (another C library function) also call my implementation of mktemp() is not. Apparently, this example was a real life bug that existed in SunOS 4.0.3's version of lpr. The book goes on to explain the fix was to add the keyword static to the definition of mktemp() in my_source.c; although changing the name altogether should have fixed this problem as well. This chapter leaves me with some unresolved questions that I hope you guys could answer: Should our software group adopt the practice of putting the keyword static in front of all functions that we don't want to be exposed? Does GCC have a way to warn about function interposition? We certainly don't ever intend on this happening and I'd like to know about it if it does. Can interposition happen with functions introduced by static libraries? Thanks for the help.

  Read the article

1