Re: Vulnerability?, posted by Konstantin Olchanski on Wed Apr 27 19:36:25 2022
|
> next is to request removal of ubuntu package.
contacted ubuntu security team, got very quick response.
they noted our request and informed us that ubuntu cannot remove packages from existing releases.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/elog/+bug/1970480
K.O. |
|
Re: Virus in latest elog?, posted by Stefan Ritt on Fri Jul 14 16:58:48 2017
|
Hi Daniel,
you're the first one reporting about this virus. We have different virus checkers here at our lab and none of them triggered. So I guess it is a false alarm.
Best,
Stefan
| Daniel Sajdyk wrote: |
|
Hello.
Today I wanted to download latest elog version, and got information from Eset Endpoint Antyvirus, that downloaded file has trojan horse "Generic.GQWFFXB".
It this false positive alarm?
Daniel
|
|
|
Re: Version of GCC to use?, posted by Stefan Ritt on Mon May 9 20:47:02 2005
|
> What is the recommended version of gcc to use with elog 2.5.9? I searched
> the discussion database but found nothing pertaining to this.
Well, the same code compiles on gcc and on Visual C++ under Windows, so
hopefully there is no dependence on the gcc version (;-)
I use gcc 3.2.3 on Scientific Linux 3.03. |
|
Re: Version of GCC to use?, posted by Steve Jones on Mon May 9 20:51:23 2005
|
> > What is the recommended version of gcc to use with elog 2.5.9? I searched
> > the discussion database but found nothing pertaining to this.
>
> Well, the same code compiles on gcc and on Visual C++ under Windows, so
> hopefully there is no dependence on the gcc version (;-)
>
> I use gcc 3.2.3 on Scientific Linux 3.03.
I ask because I get a dependency that I did not have before with 2.5.3.
Compiling with my same 'ole gcc 2.95.2 I see that I now need mxml.h and
strlcpy.h. Trying to compile under gcc 3.4 results in all kinds of errors. |
|
Re: Version of GCC to use?, posted by Stefan Ritt on Mon May 9 20:55:36 2005
|
> I ask because I get a dependency that I did not have before with 2.5.3.
> Compiling with my same 'ole gcc 2.95.2 I see that I now need mxml.h and
> strlcpy.h. Trying to compile under gcc 3.4 results in all kinds of errors.
mxml.h and strlcpy.h are part of the elog tar ball. When untar'ed, they get copied
into a separate directory:
...
-rwxr-xr-x ritt/lke 15090 2005-05-09 13:09:54 elog-2.5.9/eloglang.japanese
-rwxr-xr-x ritt/lke 17587 2005-05-09 13:09:54 elog-2.5.9/eloglang.spanish
drwxr-xr-x ritt/lke 0 2005-05-09 13:09:54 mxml/
-rwxr-xr-x ritt/lke 45577 2005-05-09 13:09:54 mxml/mxml.c
-rwxr-xr-x ritt/lke 2198 2005-05-09 13:09:54 mxml/strlcpy.c
-rwxr-xr-x ritt/lke 4359 2005-05-09 13:09:54 mxml/mxml.h
-rwxr-xr-x ritt/lke 567 2005-05-09 13:09:54 mxml/strlcpy.h
I have right now no access to 3.4. Once I get it, I will address the errors
occuring there. |
Re: Version of GCC to use?, posted by Steve Jones on Mon May 9 20:58:11 2005
|
> > I ask because I get a dependency that I did not have before with 2.5.3.
> > Compiling with my same 'ole gcc 2.95.2 I see that I now need mxml.h and
> > strlcpy.h. Trying to compile under gcc 3.4 results in all kinds of errors.
>
> mxml.h and strlcpy.h are part of the elog tar ball. When untar'ed, they get copied
> into a separate directory:
>
> ...
> -rwxr-xr-x ritt/lke 15090 2005-05-09 13:09:54 elog-2.5.9/eloglang.japanese
> -rwxr-xr-x ritt/lke 17587 2005-05-09 13:09:54 elog-2.5.9/eloglang.spanish
> drwxr-xr-x ritt/lke 0 2005-05-09 13:09:54 mxml/
> -rwxr-xr-x ritt/lke 45577 2005-05-09 13:09:54 mxml/mxml.c
> -rwxr-xr-x ritt/lke 2198 2005-05-09 13:09:54 mxml/strlcpy.c
> -rwxr-xr-x ritt/lke 4359 2005-05-09 13:09:54 mxml/mxml.h
> -rwxr-xr-x ritt/lke 567 2005-05-09 13:09:54 mxml/strlcpy.h
>
> I have right now no access to 3.4. Once I get it, I will address the errors
> occuring there.
Ah, now I need to figure out how to pickup the new includes.
BTW, personally I wouldn't take my word regarding the 3.4 errors -- I was simply
trying an alternative version and it is likely that the way ours is configured is the
problem.
Thanks! |
|
Re: Version of GCC to use?, posted by Steve Jones on Mon May 9 21:08:56 2005
|
> > > I ask because I get a dependency that I did not have before with 2.5.3.
> > > Compiling with my same 'ole gcc 2.95.2 I see that I now need mxml.h and
> > > strlcpy.h. Trying to compile under gcc 3.4 results in all kinds of errors.
> >
> > mxml.h and strlcpy.h are part of the elog tar ball. When untar'ed, they get copied
> > into a separate directory:
> >
> > ...
> > -rwxr-xr-x ritt/lke 15090 2005-05-09 13:09:54 elog-2.5.9/eloglang.japanese
> > -rwxr-xr-x ritt/lke 17587 2005-05-09 13:09:54 elog-2.5.9/eloglang.spanish
> > drwxr-xr-x ritt/lke 0 2005-05-09 13:09:54 mxml/
> > -rwxr-xr-x ritt/lke 45577 2005-05-09 13:09:54 mxml/mxml.c
> > -rwxr-xr-x ritt/lke 2198 2005-05-09 13:09:54 mxml/strlcpy.c
> > -rwxr-xr-x ritt/lke 4359 2005-05-09 13:09:54 mxml/mxml.h
> > -rwxr-xr-x ritt/lke 567 2005-05-09 13:09:54 mxml/strlcpy.h
> >
> > I have right now no access to 3.4. Once I get it, I will address the errors
> > occuring there.
>
> Ah, now I need to figure out how to pickup the new includes.
> BTW, personally I wouldn't take my word regarding the 3.4 errors -- I was simply
> trying an alternative version and it is likely that the way ours is configured is the
> problem.
>
> Thanks!
Ok, now I see the issue - the tar extract created the mxml directory in the root (not
under the created directory elog-2.5.9). Is there a reason why these includes are not
placed in the src dir like the regex.h/.c include? |
Re: Version of GCC to use?, posted by Steve Jones on Mon May 9 21:14:53 2005
|
> > > > I ask because I get a dependency that I did not have before with 2.5.3.
> > > > Compiling with my same 'ole gcc 2.95.2 I see that I now need mxml.h and
> > > > strlcpy.h. Trying to compile under gcc 3.4 results in all kinds of errors.
> > >
> > > mxml.h and strlcpy.h are part of the elog tar ball. When untar'ed, they get copied
> > > into a separate directory:
> > >
> > > ...
> > > -rwxr-xr-x ritt/lke 15090 2005-05-09 13:09:54 elog-2.5.9/eloglang.japanese
> > > -rwxr-xr-x ritt/lke 17587 2005-05-09 13:09:54 elog-2.5.9/eloglang.spanish
> > > drwxr-xr-x ritt/lke 0 2005-05-09 13:09:54 mxml/
> > > -rwxr-xr-x ritt/lke 45577 2005-05-09 13:09:54 mxml/mxml.c
> > > -rwxr-xr-x ritt/lke 2198 2005-05-09 13:09:54 mxml/strlcpy.c
> > > -rwxr-xr-x ritt/lke 4359 2005-05-09 13:09:54 mxml/mxml.h
> > > -rwxr-xr-x ritt/lke 567 2005-05-09 13:09:54 mxml/strlcpy.h
> > >
> > > I have right now no access to 3.4. Once I get it, I will address the errors
> > > occuring there.
> >
> > Ah, now I need to figure out how to pickup the new includes.
> > BTW, personally I wouldn't take my word regarding the 3.4 errors -- I was simply
> > trying an alternative version and it is likely that the way ours is configured is the
> > problem.
> >
> > Thanks!
>
>
> Ok, now I see the issue - the tar extract created the mxml directory in the root (not
> under the created directory elog-2.5.9). Is there a reason why these includes are not
> placed in the src dir like the regex.h/.c include?
Ack, ok, I moved the includes into src and tried re-compiling -- and received several
"undefined symbol" errors from the linker. Clearly the libraries cannot be moved into src? |