tftpd(8) is difficult to test in isolation due to its relationship with
inetd. Create a test program that mimics the behavior of tftp(1) and
inetd(8) and verifies tftpd's response in several different scenarios.
These test cases cover all of the basic TFTP protocol, but not the optional
parts.
PR: 157700
PR: 225996
PR: 226004
PR: 226005
MFC after: 3 weeks
Differential Revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D14310
Mainly focus on files that use BSD 2-Clause license, however the tool I
was using misidentified many licenses so this was mostly a manual - error
prone - task.
The Software Package Data Exchange (SPDX) group provides a specification
to make it easier for automated tools to detect and summarize well known
opensource licenses. We are gradually adopting the specification, noting
that the tags are considered only advisory and do not, in any way,
superceed or replace the license texts.
No functional change intended.
Mainly focus on files that use BSD 3-Clause license.
The Software Package Data Exchange (SPDX) group provides a specification
to make it easier for automated tools to detect and summarize well known
opensource licenses. We are gradually adopting the specification, noting
that the tags are considered only advisory and do not, in any way,
superceed or replace the license texts.
Special thanks to Wind River for providing access to "The Duke of
Highlander" tool: an older (2014) run over FreeBSD tree was useful as a
starting point.
Off by default, build behaves normally.
WITH_META_MODE we get auto objdir creation, the ability to
start build from anywhere in the tree.
Still need to add real targets under targets/ to build packages.
Differential Revision: D2796
Reviewed by: brooks imp
current version of FreeBSD, this isn't guarenteed by the API.
Custom security modules, or future implementations of the setuid and
setgid may fail.
Submitted by: Erik Cederstrand
Approved by: cperciva
MFC after: 3 days
This self-written compiler warning, which is hopefully going to be
committed into LLVM sources soon, warns about potentially missing
`static' keywords, similar to -Wmissing-prototypes.
- bin/pax: Move external declaration of chdname and s_mask into extern.h.
- bin/setfacl: Move setfacl.c-specific stuff out of setfacl.h.
- sbin/mount_fusefs: Remove char *progname; use getprogname().
- others: add `static' where possible.
A number of tftp clients, including the one in Intel's pxe boot loader,
may intentionally stop a transfer using error code 0 (i.e., EUNDEF).
These are not real errors. Avoid spamming log files with these by
logging them at level LOG_DEBUG instead.
Discussed on -hackers with an initial patch proposal; this change is an
improved approach suggested by kan@.
from NetBSD, with some slight changes:
=========================================================================================
http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/src/libexec/tftpd/tftpd.8?only_with_tag=MAIN#rev1.22
Revision 1.22 or diffs], Fri Jan 8 21:05:14 2010 UTC (18 months, 2 weeks ago) by christos
Patrick Welche <prlw1@cam.ac.uk>
- add -p pathsep option
- make wrap to zero work, but produce a warning
While here:
- fix gcc warnings, in particular variable clobbered warnings
(compiling with fewer warnings does not really fix the problem)
=========================================================================================
These wording changes clarify the default rollover behavior
as a "kludge". Also, the block numbers and octet counts for 65535 blocks
and 32767 blocks are more accurate than the existing documented numbers.
Requested by: Pawan Gupta <pawang at juniper dot net>
Obtained from: Juniper Networks
Approved by: re (kib)
the block counter would rollover to 0 if a file larger
than 65535 blocks was transferred. With the default block size
of 512 octets per block, this is a file size of approximately 32 megabytes.
The new TFTP server code would report an error and stop transferring
the file if a file was larger than 65535 blocks.
This patch restores the old TFTP server's behavior to the new
TFTP server code. If a TFTP client transfers a file larger
than 65535 blocks, and does *not* specify the "rollover" option,
then automatically rollover the block counter to 0 every time
we reach 65535 blocks.
This restores interoperability with the FreeBSD 6 TFTP client.
Without this change, if a FreeBSD 6 TFTP client tried to
retrieve a file larger than 65535 blocks from a FreeBSD 9 TFTP server
, the transfer would fail.
The same file could be retrieved successfully if the same FreeBSD 6
TFTP client was used against a FreeBSD 6 TFTP server.
Approved by: re (kib)
Tested by: Pawan Gupta <pawang at juniper dot net>,
Obtained from: Juniper Networks
tftp implementation. The synchnet() function
was converted to a no-op when the new TFTP implementation
was committed to FreeBSD. However, this function, as it was
in the older code, is needed
in order to synchronize between the tftpd server and tftp clients,
which may be buggy.
Specifically, we had a buggy TFTP client which would send
TFTP ACK packets for non-TFTP packets, which would cause
the count of packets to get out of whack, causing transfers
to fail with the new TFTPD implementation.
Obtained from: Juniper Networks
Submitted by: Santhanakrishnan Balraj <sbalraj at juniper dot net>
also was inappropriate as it triggered for every EACCESS and ENOTFOUND, not
just the case the -n option is intended to deal with and thus really spammed
us with ~20 messages in the default configuration when booting a diskless
FreeBSD client, introduced with r207608 again.
MFC after: 1 week
lot better than what's in the tree now. Edwin tested it at a prior
employer, but can't test it today. I've found that it works a lot
better with the various uboot versions that I've used in my embedded
work. Here's the pkg-descr from the port that describes the changes:
It all started when we got some new routers, which told me the
following when trying to upload configuration or download images
from it: The TFTP server doesn't support the blocksize option.
My curiousity was triggered, it took me some reading of RFCs and
other documentation to find out what was possible and what could
be done. Was plain TFTP very simple in its handshake, TFTP with
options was kind of messy because of its backwards capability: The
first packet returned could either be an acknowledgement of options,
or the first data packet.
Going through the source code of src/libexec/tftpd and going through
the code of src/usr.bin/tftp showed that there was a lot of duplicate
code, and the addition of options would only increase the amount
of duplicate code. After all, both the client and the server can
act as a sender and receiver.
At the end, it ended up with a nearly complete rewrite of the tftp
client and server. It has been tested against the following TFTP
clients and servers:
- Itself (yay!)
- The standard FreeBSD tftp client and server
- The Fedora Core 6 tftp client and server
- Cisco router tftp client
- Extreme Networks tftp client
It supports the following RFCs:
RFC1350 - THE TFTP PROTOCOL (REVISION 2)
RFC2347 - TFTP Option Extension
RFC2348 - TFTP Blocksize Option
RFC2349 - TFTP Timeout Interval and Transfer Size Options
RFC3617 - Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) Scheme and Applicability
Statement for the Trivial File Transfer Protocol (TFTP)
It supports the following unofficial TFTP Options as described at
http://www.compuphase.com/tftp.htm:
blksize2 - Block size restricted to powers of 2, excluding protocol headers
rollover - Block counter roll-over (roll back to zero or to one)
From the tftp program point of view the following things are changed:
- New commands: "blocksize", "blocksize2", "rollover" and "options"
- Development features: "debug" and "packetdrop"
If you try this tftp/tftpd implementation, please let me know if
it works (or doesn't work) and against which implementaion so I can
get a list of confirmed working systems.
Author: Edwin Groothuis <edwin@FreeBSD.org>
Just like bin/ and sbin/, I think setting WARNS to the highest value
possible will make it more attractive for people to fix warnings.
- The WARNS variable is set in the Makefile in the directory of the
application itself, making it more likely that it will be removed out
of curiosity to see what happens.
- New applications will most likely build with WARNS=6 out of the box,
because the author would more likely fix the warnings during
development than lower WARNS.
Unfortunately almost all apps in libexec require a lowered value of
WARNS.
