run linux's program

[johnzlly]

Hi,all.
First,welcome 4.4's release.
Recently,i run the linux's program and hit one problem.
The wrong meseage is something like below

Bad system core dump.

So,what cause the error? Or how many situations are there?

[ocicat]

Originally Posted by johnzlly

Recently,i run the linux's program and hit one problem.

It is unclear as to what preparation (if any...) was done prior to executing the binary.

Study Section 9.4 of the FAQ:

http://openbsd.org/faq/faq9.html#Interact

...along with the compat_linux(8) manpage.

[johnzlly]

Thanks for your reply ,ocicat.
I had done the steps.
1.Install the fedora_base package.
2.Set the kern.emul.linux=1.
3.Pull the neccessary lib files.
And when run the program which just give me one hint.
It's "Bad system call (core dumped).".
That's all.

[jggimi]

It appears that your unnamed application is attempting a system call which does not exist in the compat_linux ABI.

You can track system calls with systrace(1), e.g.:

$ systrace -A <your_unnamed_application>

After failure, you will find the system calls in the ~/.systrace hierarchy.

[Oko]

I do not know for others but it is entirely unclear to me based on your message if the above unnamed Linux binaries where compiled on 2.6 or 2.4 Linux kernel. OpenBSD emulation supports only binaries compiled on 2.4 kernel on Fedora compatible systems. In particular those binaries MUST use only static Linux libraries.

My hunch although never tried running anything but Opera which is in ports is that effectively means that you could get binaries for any Read Hat based distribution and run it (Rad Hat, Fedora, Cent OS) excluding any programs which involve Linux drivers of any kind, ALSA, and dynamic libraries as well as Linux specific system calls .

You already got some very good advices about system calls in above messages.

[johnzlly]

Originally Posted by jggimi

$ systrace -A <your_unnamed_application>

After failure, you will find the system calls in the ~/.systrace hierarchy.

Thanks for your advice.I'll have a try.But i don't known what can i do when i got the ~/.systrace file.
If this unnamed application indeed have a system call which does not exist in the compat_linux ABI, something like what must be done.

Originally Posted by Oko

I do not know for others but it is entirely unclear to me based on your message if the above unnamed Linux binaries where compiled on 2.6 or 2.4 Linux kernel.

I don't known which kernel the binary was compiled.

Originally Posted by Oko

which involve Linux drivers of any kind

I doubt the application associated with the linux drivers. Because the application is the Authentication program for IEEE80211.

[TerryP]

You might try running the file utility on the program, it can sometimes tell you what OS/Version a binary was compiled for. Here is an example from FreeBSD:

Terry@dixie$ file /bin/sh                                                  7:59
/bin/sh: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (FreeBSD), for FreeBSD 7.0 (700109), dynamically linked (uses shared libs), FreeBSD-style, stripped
Terry@dixie$ file /usr/local/lib/linux-flock/flock-bin                     8:01
/usr/local/lib/linux-flock/flock-bin: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), for GNU/Linux 2.2.0, dynamically linked (uses shared libs), stripped
Terry@dixie$                                                               8:01

[jggimi]

Originally Posted by johnzlly

...But i don't known what can i do when i got the ~/.systrace file.

It's not a file. It is a directory structure, which will log all syscalls as they are made.

Read the systrace man page for detailed information. Note the link to it, above.

[richardpl]

Originally Posted by johnzlly

I doubt the application associated with the linux drivers. Because the application is the Authentication program for IEEE80211.

And why are you using that linux program, and not native one?

Authenticator for IEEE80211 clearly (must) use system specific calls. And such calls are not emulated because there is no point in doing such thing ...

[johnzlly]

Originally Posted by richardpl

Authenticator for IEEE80211 clearly (must) use system specific calls. And such calls are not emulated because there is no point in doing such thing ...

It's the thing that i worried about,too.

Originally Posted by richardpl

And why are you using that linux program, and not native one?

The company only provide the linux&MS client program.Because there is little people using the BSDs in our country.So i must run the program or my openbsd box can't connect the internet.
I used to run the wpa_supplicant utility,but it can't pass the authentication.

#wpa_supplicant -Dwired -c/etc/wpa_supplicant.conf -i em0 
#cat /etc/wpa_supplicant.conf
ctrl_interface=/var/run/wpa_supplicant

ctrl_interface_group=wheel

ap_scan=0

network={

key_mgmt=IEEE8021X

eap=MD5

identity="username"

password="password"

eapol_flags=0

}

[richardpl]

What is linux client program name? Is it open source? Is IEEE80211 authenticator standard one?

Looking at your configuration file, I think it have some wrong/missing lines, but without real information how is your environment configured it is very hard to help you.

In case that linux folks use wpa_supplicant than it should work on OpenBSD if you chose correct chiper and key managment.

[jggimi]

For 4.4, WPA and WPA2-PSK support was added, for several models of WiFi NIC.

Only native OpenBSD support for these cards is available.

Here's the announcement with details from the OpenBSD Journal:

http://undeadly.org/cgi?action=artic...20080416195151

[richardpl]

@jggimi: you missed fact that OP is using wpa_supplicant via wired interface, in such case WiFi drivers are irrelevant.

[Oko]

Originally Posted by richardpl

@jggimi: you missed fact that OP is using wpa_supplicant via wired interface, in such case WiFi drivers are irrelevant.

And OpenBSD DID have the support for wpa_supplicant via wired interface
much before it got support for WiFi interfaces.

Originally Posted by richardpl

And why are you using that linux program, and not native one?

Authenticator for IEEE80211 clearly (must) use system specific calls. And such calls are not emulated because there is no point in doing such thing ...

Exactly!!! Straight to the point.

If he uses some kind of Linux client to connect to his company network
the client is probably open source and it must be available for BSD. What happens is that companies do not want to provide support for BSD so they
insist on using binaries for Windows, OS X, Linux, and often for Solaris.

I was in similar situation at the University Arizona where they were using
Cisco 3000 for VPN. OpenBSD has a client for Cicso 3000 but one needs to know user name and password which is usually provided in some kind of crypted file. The low level guys insisted that I change operating system
instead of providing me with the information. Instead of that I extracted information using online tools as the Ciscso 3000 has well documented vulnerability. Actually the vulnerability was pointed out to me by the director of security operations who didn't want to change official policy about providing information but was more than happy to
tell me how to crack the code.

On the funny note he was also using OpenBSD on his desktop machine instead of mandatory Solaris

[jggimi]

You're right, I missed it.

Johnzlly seems to have two choices: either use native tools, or use another OS.

[johnzlly]

Thanks for all replys.

Originally Posted by Oko

If he uses some kind of Linux client to connect to his company network
the client is probably open source and it must be available for BSD. What happens is that companies do not want to provide support for BSD so they
insist on using binaries for Windows, OS X, Linux, and often for Solaris.

I was in similar situation at the University Arizona where they were using
Cisco 3000 for VPN.

You said it. I'm in the Huaqiao University now.
The linux program isn't open source.IEEE80211 authenticator can use either standard broadcast or private one.
The procedure for authentication as Attachment(which is in the help doc from the MS client program):
Additionally I install the wpa_supplicant utility through the package.

Originally Posted by jggimi

Johnzlly seems to have two choices: either use native tools, or use another OS.

If the native tool can do the job,I'll give up the linux program and use the native tools.And i hope so.
But i can confirm that i won't change the OS,unless the distribution is unactive.

Originally Posted by richardpl

if you chose correct chiper and key managment.

I don't known the correct chiper.How can i confirm it?

[richardpl]

That image is not very usefull. If you could post name of program that is used under linux/MS it could be more helpfull. Also complete explanation what type of data and in which order is entered in such applications could be also helpfull.

[johnzlly]

The name of program is xrgsu.

[richardpl]

Reading http://www.computernewbie.info/wheat...sers-in-china/ give more information.


Look this one:
http://209.85.135.104/search?q=cache...lnk&cd=3&gl=hr

That's all for now folks, I currently dont have time to explore ruijie+wpa_supplicant combination.

[BSDfan666]

I think this is a proprietary form of authentication, it's definitely hard to sift through all the Chinese documents online, but there appears to be some information for Linux and OS X.. and maybe even FreeBSD.

Searching the OpenBSD mailing list for "Ruijie" or "xrgsu" returned nothing, clearly it's not in high demand.

Here is my only contribution to this thread, is it relevant? I have no idea:
http://linux.hrbeu.edu.cn/main/node/32
http://translate.google.ca/translate...hl=en&ie=UTF-8

Hope it helps..