From: sthibault@debian.org   
      
   Hello,   
      
   Hefee, le jeu. 19 févr. 2026 13:05:26 +0100, a ecrit:   
   > we are now in 2026 so this is open since more than 10 years now :( I would   
   > like to fix this. Unfortunately I do not understand why this patch fix the   
   usage   
   > on hurd.   
   >   
   > Can you explain why this fixes the issue?   
      
   Looking at the change, it seems to be circumventing the fact that   
   syscall() is not really defined on GNU/Hurd.  Instead of defining   
   arbitrary values for TSOCKS_NR_*, we could as well put the syscall   
   redirection code inside #ifndef __GNU__ since there is nothing to   
   redirect, applications running on GNU/Hurd won't ever be using   
   syscall().   
      
   Samuel   
      
   > Actually you need to convince upstream to add your patch. I want to have a   
   > minimal diff with upstream, that's why I would only include it in Debian if   
   > upstream accepts the patch. I can also forward a MR, but without being able   
   to   
   > explain it does not make sense to forward a MR.   
   >   
   > https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/torsocks/-/merge_requests   
   >   
   > Regards,   
   >   
   > hefee   
   >   
   > --   
   >   
   > On Donnerstag, 20. Juli 2017 11:58 Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:   
   > > [intrigeri 2014]   
   > >   
   > > > Hi David,   
   > > >   
   > > > could you please have a look at this Debian bug report:   
   > > >   https://bugs.debian.org/767235   
   > > >   
   > > > Thanks in advance!   
   > > >   
   > > > [Dropping the "patch" tag, as it seems unclear that the patch actually   
   > > > does the right thing.]   
   > >   
   > > As far as I can tell, the tsocks_syscall() function is not used on Hurd,   
   > > thus failing to hijack connect(), close(), socket() and several other   
   > > system calls.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)