Like 5.5.0alpha, 5.7.0alpha won't be released, it's just to mark that
the branch is not stable.
Once again there is no API/ABI stability for new features in devel
versions. The major soname won't be bumped even if API/ABI of new
features breaks between devel releases.
If xz is given a directory, it should look like this:
$ xz /usr/bin
xz: /usr/bin: Is a directory, skipping
The Landlock rules didn't allow opening directories for reading:
$ xz /usr/bin
xz: /usr/bin: Permission denied
The simplest fix was to allow opening directories for reading.
While it's a bit silly to allow it solely for the error message,
it shouldn't make the sandbox significantly weaker.
The single-file use case (like when called from GNU tar) is
still as strict as possible: all Landlock restrictions are
enabled before (de)compression starts.
This makes these sandboxing methods stricter when no files are
created or deleted. That is, it's a middle ground between the
initial sandbox and the strictest single-file-to-stdout sandbox:
this allows opening files for reading but output has to go to stdout.
Linux 6.7 added support for ABI version 4 which restricts
TCP connections which xz won't need and thus those can be
forbidden now. Since the ABI version is handled at runtime,
supporting version 4 won't cause any compatibility issues.
Note that new enough kernel headers are required to get
version 4 support enabled at build time.
Landlock is now always used just like pledge(2) is: first in more
permissive mode and later (under certain common conditions) in
a strict mode that doesn't allow opening more files.
I put pledge(2) first in sandbox.c because it's the simplest API
to use and still somewhat fine-grained for basic applications.
So it's the simplest thing to understand for anyone reading sandbox.c.
Also explicitly initialize progress_automatic to make it clear
that it can be read before message_init() sets it. Static variable
was initialized to false by default already so this is only for
clarity.
GCC docs promise that it works and a few other compilers do
too. Clang/LLVM is documented source code only but unsurprisingly
it behaves the same as others on x86-64 at least. But the
certainly-portable way is good enough here so use that.
The x32 port has a x86-64 ABI in term of all registers but uses only
32bit pointer like x86-32. The assembly optimisation fails to compile on
x32. Given the state of x32 I suggest to exclude it from the
optimisation rather than trying to fix it.
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <sebastian@breakpoint.cc>
It's used only for basic bittrees and fixed-size reverse bittree
because those showed a clear benefit on x86-64 with GCC and Clang.
The other methods were more mixed and thus are commented out but
they should be tested on other archs.
Now extra buffer space is reserved so that repeating bytes for
any single match will never need to copy from two places (both
the beginning and the end of the buffer). This simplifies
dict_repeat() and helps a little with speed.
This seems to reduce .lzma decompression time about 2 %, so
with .xz and CRC it could be slightly less. The small things
add up still.
It's not completely obvious if this is better in the decoder.
It should be good if compiler can avoid creating a branch
(like using CMOV on x86).
This also makes lzma_encoder.c use the new macros.
The new decoder resumes the first decoder loop in the Resumable mode.
Then, the code executes in Non-resumable mode until it detects that it
cannot guarantee to have enough input/output to decode another symbol.
The Resumable mode is how the decoder has always worked. Before decoding
every input bit, it checks if there is enough space and will save its
location to be resumed later. When the decoder has more input/output,
it jumps back to the correct sequence in the Resumable mode code.
When the input/output buffers are large, the Resumable mode is much
slower than the Non-resumable because it has more branches and is harder
for the compiler to optimize since it is in a large switch block.
Early benchmarking shows significant time improvement (8-10% on gcc and
clang x86) by using the Non-resumable code as much as possible.
The new "safe" range decoder mode is the same as old range decoder, but
now the default behavior of the range decoder will not check if there is
enough input or output to complete the operation. When the buffers are
close to fully consumed, the "safe" operations must be used instead. This
will improve speed because it will reduce the number of branches needed
for most of the range decoder operations.
The main reason is a kind of silly one:
xz-man.pot contains strings from all man pages in XZ Utils.
The man pages of xzdiff, xzgrep, and xzmore were under GPLv2
and the rest under 0BSD. Thus xz-man.pot contained strings
under two licences. po4a creates the translated man pages
from the combined 0BSD+GPLv2 xz-man.pot.
I haven't liked this mixing in xz-man.pot but the
Translation Project requires that all man pages must be
in the same .pot file. So a separate xz-man-gpl.pot
wasn't an option.
Since these man pages are short, rewriting them was quick enough.
Now xz-man.pot is entirely under 0BSD and marking the per-file
licenses is simpler.
As a bonus, some wording hopefully is now slightly better
although it's perhaps a matter of taste.
NOTE: In xzgrep.1, the EXIT STATUS section was written by me
in the commit d796b6d7fd so that's
why that section could be taken as is from the old xzgrep.1.
Perhaps the generated files aren't even copyrightable but
using the same license for them as for the rest of the liblzma
keeps things more consistent for tools that look for license info.
The initial commit 5d018dc035
in 2007 had a comment in sha256.c that the code is based on
Crypto++ Library 5.5.1. In 2009 the Authors list in sha256.c
and the AUTHORS file was updated with information that the
code had come from Crypto++ but via 7-Zip. I know I had viewed
7-Zip's SHA-256 code but back then the C code has been identical
enough with Crypto++, so I don't why I thought the author info
would need that extra step via 7-Zip for this single file.
Another error is that I had mixed sha.* and shacal2.* files
when checking for author info in Crypto++. The shacal2.* files
aren't related to liblzma's sha256.c and thus Kevin Springle's
code in Crypto++ isn't either.
Jia Tan