DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:subject:references:to:from:reply-to:message-id
	:date:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type
	:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=default; b=rQyThHlwykMp1I5U
	+TXyZOamXB0SsKB2WPpQbvmGrp3Z1jbX7jocrUSI7goNQi7hum0OO3DbakoTy4kF
	lOMmR9rP7kGhda3rExa5c9TQe6/tPyF0vG9arvpVUSVj3WAO4HhCZQFXYykfx8YK
	p2TXSiS10HQJWW/bIHd+ZBezV1U=
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Safeness of arc4random while fork
References: <CAB2YY7FGEcAyVmCBJZwJ+mm4DzrWxyQbR-a8rw7YdYnR2aRxTg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
From: Brian Inglis <Brian DOT Inglis AT SystematicSw DOT ab DOT ca>
Reply-To: Brian DOT Inglis AT SystematicSw DOT ab DOT ca
Message-ID: <7c30f4dc-1216-f35c-9c9a-41177a8ce260@SystematicSw.ab.ca>
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2017 11:30:23 -0600
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAB2YY7FGEcAyVmCBJZwJ+mm4DzrWxyQbR-a8rw7YdYnR2aRxTg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 2017-04-30 07:12, Kinichiro Inoguchi wrote:
> I saw this issue while building LibreSSL on Cygwin64.
> I had downloaded LibreSSL tar ball from here.
> https://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/LibreSSL/libressl-2.5.3.tar.gz
> And I tried to build it, build was ok, but 1 regression test failed.
> This test is testing the safeness of arc4random() while forking.
> With other platforms, linux, *bsd, OSX, MinGW64, this test never
> fail.
> I checked FAQ and ML archives, but couldn't find anything.
> Has anyone experienced this already ?
> Could someone check the implementation of arc4random functions,
> please ?
...
> FAIL: arc4randomforktest.sh
> ...
> I posted this issue to LibreSSL project, too.
> https://github.com/libressl-portable/portable/issues/289

The Cygwin project does not provide or support a libressl package; 
there may be good reasons why no package was provided so far: 
some upstream projects will not accept a Cygwin patch, so Cygwin 
volunteers may decide the package is not long term maintainable, 
or adapting the package may need a lot of work, as advised in:

	https://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/2016-03/msg00117.html

So a fork regression test designed for Unix failed on Windows: 
maybe describe what the test does, what fails on Cygwin, and why 
that is a problem? 
What does "safeness" mean, what does your test log show, and was 
it a fork failure?

Does your package build Cygwin dlls, and did you follow recent 
advice posted for developers about using rebase on package dlls:

	https://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2017-03/msg00135.html 

Are you running any https://cygwin.com/acronyms/#BLODA apps shown:

	https://cygwin.com/faq/faq.html#faq.using.bloda

that could interfere with Cygwin fork, mainly intrusive AV/AMW? 

Maybe post a https://cygwin.com/acronyms/#STC (Simple Test Case) 
using extracts from the test code, the compilation and run output, 
and describe the results, so someone can look at it and say if 
something needs changed in upstream code, the test can be adjusted 
for Cygwin's emulation of Unix fork using Windows calls, if 
something in Cygwin can be improved or fixed, or if that's just 
the way Cygwin works.

Please read the FAQ and documentation about fork, and follow 
the problem reporting guidelines below, and a volunteer Cygwin 
maintainer may get time to take a look at the issue, or you 
could submit a patch yourself https://cygwin.com/acronyms/#PTC 
either upstream or to Cygwin. 

-- 
Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple