fork(); printf("Ash is full of shit because this works\n");
More specifically, the crash is a result of the fact that macOS cannot guarentee the libraries you are using are async-signal-safe. POSIX demands that you are able to guarentee a process can be forked at anytime, even in a signal handler.
There is no guaranteed order of thread execution, your threads are synchronized, or not.
It's true, there is no guarenteed order of thread execution, but I said 'events'. If my thread sends back events '1,2,3', I expect to recieve '1,2,3', not '3,1,2'. There is nothing in the pthread specification that allows this behaviour and I don't care for the sloppy libc workaround.
Not standard unix permissions: chattr +i, selinux But all three return EPERM.
I was actually thinking about the incorrect use of EACCES for non-file permission related activites when opening related files in RAW mode, which has confused ported applications to get into a root access request loop.
I imagine your face would melt if you had to port software between actual unix systems like AIX, Solaris or HP-UX.
Well, you'll be suprised to learn it was fun and paid well. I have ported c applications from SunOS 5.8 to Solaris 9 and rewrote some Cobol applications from HP-UX systems (which were very system dependent designed, so took a fair bit of learning) into Java (where the only system dependent functionality was a file drop location).
But this is different from where someone says, "MacOS' Unix bits are pretty stable and function as expected other than a bit of changes here and there such as in how stuff is configured".
They don't work exactly like Linux does either... shocker.
You misunderstand, when I talk about UNIX or POSIX compliance, I am referring to the UNIX 03 certification that Leopard originally passed which includes POSIX compliance in it's specification (although, I believe it shouldn't have passed due to the tests performed were insufficient to detect all of it's incorrect behaviours).
Nope, it wasn't. My partner isn't even British. After many issues to consider, I decided to ignore all the political, sovereignty and human rights issues and base my vote on the remain campaign's focus of economics. I decided to look at the trends for GDP growth (just updated that for you with last year's data too) and base my decision of that. The European Union verses other continents and such show consistent negative growth trends while others are growing. Meanwhile, the only thing I could find was short term issues regarding the UK post what people describe as a 'hard brexit' now and uncertainty. But at least, not the consistent certainty of the EU as shown in the graph I have provided.
Nothing else influenced in my decision here, even though I am very opinioned on a wide spectrum of EU, UK, RoI, PL politics and industires.
The leave campaing was centred entirely around the issue of immigration.
To be fair, I didn't really absorb or look at the leave campaign's stuff. I was already intimately familiar with the adverse affects issues like the common fisheries policy, the common agricultural policy and various green initiatives. Particularly since I had voted for specific MEPs in the past to correct some of the problems that have been on going for the last 70 years, some of them that caused Iceland to leave the EU over.
They wouldn't even talk about jobs because they knew that if they did they'd have to discuss the fact there would be fewer jobs in the UK post Brexit.
You're probably right, I have no idea what they said.
I read your comment and it just sticks out to me like a sore thumb. I genuinely don't understand your experience. I get the distinct impression you haven't ever had the ordeal of trying to port unix applications over to macOS or worked on teams that maintain macports/darwinports/brew and tried to trace down all the stack traces from crashing POSIX userland and developing macOS specific patch fixes. In which case, I wonder what your actual experience in this really is?
MacOS' Unix bits are pretty stable and function as expected
As a user of macOS calling out people saying they haven't tried, I don't know how you missed that it can't even fork() without exec() (as in, it crashes the application), nor handle pthread events in the correct order (violates standards and causes application crashes) and SIP breaks stated unix permissions identified on the filesystem and even returns the wrong error. All of these by the way are required by the certification macOS was supposed to be certified for, but it's clear their testing for compliance was insufficient. The most hilarious thing about this is that the POSIX subsystem for Windows, Linux etc. have no problem following.
That's just scratching the surface on macOS's poor unix support which has required a wide variety of special platform dependent changes (more than others) for cross platform Unix software when compiled for macOS for a reason.
Microsoft's own Linux-bits port
I use Microsoft's (poorly named) "Bash on Ubuntu on Windows" and it emulates a Linux kernel's standard syskernels with ELF binary support in a seperate windows subsystem. It runs an Ubuntu userland (no special executables, these are the same repos used for the official distro) and while there is lack for a few things I consider like IPv6 support or a native xserver (you can at least a win32 x11 server like xming just fine though -- although not much different from needing xquartz on Mac to do the same thing), it runs pretty and well and the kicker is, the issues I described above with macOS's unix support do not exist, meaning that this subsystem is more UNIX and POSIX compliant than macOS is.
Often crashes the entire computer
Cygwin or Microsoft's efforts on POSIX commonly crash the entire computer? I don't really believe you. I can't even think of the last time I saw a userland / ring-3 application from Cygnus or Microsoft crash the entire system, nevermind "often".
The default for OS X is to only allow signed applications to run, this includes application that are not distributed by the app store.
I work around it by giving my Mac users a command ( to copy paste into a terminal (opened through spotlight with exact instructions) that automatically downloads and installs the given unsigned software they need to use. It's basically a shell script that sets it up locally, bypassing the restrictions, command is just something like:
curl -fsSL http://server/script.bsh | bash -e
I've found many Mac users otherwise just find it hard to do things like downloading a.dmg and copying the package to the Applications path, nevermind right clicking (be it two fingers on the mouse or control + click) and choosing 'open' for something unsigned. Adding Applications to the Dock also seemed to be another difficulty some couldn't wrap their heads around. Using a script also saves me the drama of trying to get them to find the correct version for what version of macOS they're using.
It shocks me how many people on Slashdot don't know GPOs or the registry values they manipulate. It was always easily opt out for those technically inclined that know how to use Windows generally.
You've been told to stop involving me and others in your criminal activities. You are in direct violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Slashdot is not a platform for your illegal spam and illegal comments. Your activities have only caused Slashdot to tighten filters to the point that insightful commentary is now difficult to try to deal with you.
You have previously violated on Slashdot privacy rights, promoted offers without the express written consent of Slashdot Media, your content is destructive due to what has happened with Slashdot filters and embedding advertising without the express written consent of Slashdot media. All of these are against the Slashdot's "Terms of Use" and in turn you have violated the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.
Your criminal activities are unacceptable and your continued persistence after being advised of such means you willfully and intentionally violate the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and Slashdot's "Terms of Use" to further propogate your spam without a care that you are responsibile for further ruining discourse on Slashdot.
You've been asked to stop, you've been told to stop, you've even been banned and you continue. Your persistance in unethical and criminal behaviour is disgusting.
Your continued knowingly repettition of unethical and criminal activities show what kind of disgusting person you are, APK. Cease and desist your unethical and criminal activities immediately.
This sock puppeting is still in violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and Slashdot's "Terms of Use", cease and desist your disgusting unethical and criminal activities immediately, APK. You are knowingly violating the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and Slashdot's "Terms of Use" and you are adding more to your infractions.
This sock puppeting is still in violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, cease and desist your disgusting unethical and criminal activities immediately, APK. You are knowingly violating the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and Slashdot's "Terms of Use".
Slashdot Mirror
More specifically, the crash is a result of the fact that macOS cannot guarentee the libraries you are using are async-signal-safe. POSIX demands that you are able to guarentee a process can be forked at anytime, even in a signal handler.
It's true, there is no guarenteed order of thread execution, but I said 'events'. If my thread sends back events '1,2,3', I expect to recieve '1,2,3', not '3,1,2'. There is nothing in the pthread specification that allows this behaviour and I don't care for the sloppy libc workaround.
I was actually thinking about the incorrect use of EACCES for non-file permission related activites when opening related files in RAW mode, which has confused ported applications to get into a root access request loop.
Well, you'll be suprised to learn it was fun and paid well. I have ported c applications from SunOS 5.8 to Solaris 9 and rewrote some Cobol applications from HP-UX systems (which were very system dependent designed, so took a fair bit of learning) into Java (where the only system dependent functionality was a file drop location).
But this is different from where someone says, "MacOS' Unix bits are pretty stable and function as expected other than a bit of changes here and there such as in how stuff is configured".
You misunderstand, when I talk about UNIX or POSIX compliance, I am referring to the UNIX 03 certification that Leopard originally passed which includes POSIX compliance in it's specification (although, I believe it shouldn't have passed due to the tests performed were insufficient to detect all of it's incorrect behaviours).
Nope, it wasn't. My partner isn't even British. After many issues to consider, I decided to ignore all the political, sovereignty and human rights issues and base my vote on the remain campaign's focus of economics. I decided to look at the trends for GDP growth (just updated that for you with last year's data too) and base my decision of that. The European Union verses other continents and such show consistent negative growth trends while others are growing. Meanwhile, the only thing I could find was short term issues regarding the UK post what people describe as a 'hard brexit' now and uncertainty. But at least, not the consistent certainty of the EU as shown in the graph I have provided.
Nothing else influenced in my decision here, even though I am very opinioned on a wide spectrum of EU, UK, RoI, PL politics and industires.
To be fair, I didn't really absorb or look at the leave campaign's stuff. I was already intimately familiar with the adverse affects issues like the common fisheries policy, the common agricultural policy and various green initiatives. Particularly since I had voted for specific MEPs in the past to correct some of the problems that have been on going for the last 70 years, some of them that caused Iceland to leave the EU over.
You're probably right, I have no idea what they said.
I read your comment and it just sticks out to me like a sore thumb. I genuinely don't understand your experience. I get the distinct impression you haven't ever had the ordeal of trying to port unix applications over to macOS or worked on teams that maintain macports/darwinports/brew and tried to trace down all the stack traces from crashing POSIX userland and developing macOS specific patch fixes. In which case, I wonder what your actual experience in this really is?
As a user of macOS calling out people saying they haven't tried, I don't know how you missed that it can't even fork() without exec() (as in, it crashes the application), nor handle pthread events in the correct order (violates standards and causes application crashes) and SIP breaks stated unix permissions identified on the filesystem and even returns the wrong error. All of these by the way are required by the certification macOS was supposed to be certified for, but it's clear their testing for compliance was insufficient. The most hilarious thing about this is that the POSIX subsystem for Windows, Linux etc. have no problem following.
That's just scratching the surface on macOS's poor unix support which has required a wide variety of special platform dependent changes (more than others) for cross platform Unix software when compiled for macOS for a reason.
I use Microsoft's (poorly named) "Bash on Ubuntu on Windows" and it emulates a Linux kernel's standard syskernels with ELF binary support in a seperate windows subsystem. It runs an Ubuntu userland (no special executables, these are the same repos used for the official distro) and while there is lack for a few things I consider like IPv6 support or a native xserver (you can at least a win32 x11 server like xming just fine though -- although not much different from needing xquartz on Mac to do the same thing), it runs pretty and well and the kicker is, the issues I described above with macOS's unix support do not exist, meaning that this subsystem is more UNIX and POSIX compliant than macOS is.
Cygwin or Microsoft's efforts on POSIX commonly crash the entire computer? I don't really believe you. I can't even think of the last time I saw a userland / ring-3 application from Cygnus or Microsoft crash the entire system, nevermind "often".
I work around it by giving my Mac users a command ( to copy paste into a terminal (opened through spotlight with exact instructions) that automatically downloads and installs the given unsigned software they need to use. It's basically a shell script that sets it up locally, bypassing the restrictions, command is just something like:
I've found many Mac users otherwise just find it hard to do things like downloading a .dmg and copying the package to the Applications path, nevermind right clicking (be it two fingers on the mouse or control + click) and choosing 'open' for something unsigned. Adding Applications to the Dock also seemed to be another difficulty some couldn't wrap their heads around. Using a script also saves me the drama of trying to get them to find the correct version for what version of macOS they're using.
That's not why I voted, you lying scum.
When they say Scotland is 15 billion in debt in this article, who exactly are they referring to?
I know from real world experience that it doesn't ignore them. Windows update registry keys are respected.
It shocks me how many people on Slashdot don't know GPOs or the registry values they manipulate. It was always easily opt out for those technically inclined that know how to use Windows generally.
You've been told to stop involving me and others in your criminal activities. You are in direct violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Slashdot is not a platform for your illegal spam and illegal comments. Your activities have only caused Slashdot to tighten filters to the point that insightful commentary is now difficult to try to deal with you.
You have previously violated on Slashdot privacy rights, promoted offers without the express written consent of Slashdot Media, your content is destructive due to what has happened with Slashdot filters and embedding advertising without the express written consent of Slashdot media. All of these are against the Slashdot's "Terms of Use" and in turn you have violated the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.
Your criminal activities are unacceptable and your continued persistence after being advised of such means you willfully and intentionally violate the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and Slashdot's "Terms of Use" to further propogate your spam without a care that you are responsibile for further ruining discourse on Slashdot.
You've been asked to stop, you've been told to stop, you've even been banned and you continue. Your persistance in unethical and criminal behaviour is disgusting.
Litterally, just fix them ASAP.
You have been told to cease your criminal acts and you still persist, APK.
You have been told to cease your criminal acts and you still persist, APK.
Cease your criminal activities immediately, APK.
Cease your criminal activities immediately, APK.
Your persistent willful criminal activities have revealed exactly what kind of person you are. Stop involving Slashdot and others in your crimes.
Your persistent willful criminal activities have revealed exactly what kind of person you are. Stop involving Slashdot and others in your crimes.
Immediately cease these criminal activities.
Immediately cease these criminal activities.
Cease these criminal acitivites, immediately.
Cease these criminal acitivites.
Your continued knowingly repettition of unethical and criminal activities show what kind of disgusting person you are, APK. Cease and desist your unethical and criminal activities immediately.
This sock puppeting is still in violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and Slashdot's "Terms of Use", cease and desist your disgusting unethical and criminal activities immediately, APK. You are knowingly violating the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and Slashdot's "Terms of Use" and you are adding more to your infractions.
This sock puppeting is still in violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, cease and desist your disgusting unethical and criminal activities immediately, APK. You are knowingly violating the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and Slashdot's "Terms of Use".
Your sock puppeting is still in violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, cease and desist your unethical and criminal activities immediately.
Cease and desist your criminal activities immediately, APK. Your disgusting behaviour is unwanted.