[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120106100520.GA7962@elte.hu>
Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2012 11:05:20 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Federica Teodori <federica.teodori@...glemail.com>,
Lucian Adrian Grijincu <lucian.grijincu@...il.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
Dan Rosenberg <drosenberg@...curity.com>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2012.1] fs: symlink restrictions on sticky directories
* Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> Maybe true for a general purpose computer, but someone who is
> making a single-purpose device such as a digital TV or a wifi
> router won't want it.
That's the case for 99% of the features and semantics we have:
by definition a single-purpose device uses only a small sub-set
of an infinite purpose OS, right?
Still we only modularize semantics out if they easily fit into
some existing plug-in/module concept, if the feature is arguably
oddball that a sizable portion of people want to disable, or if
it makes notable sense for size reasons. To me it looked
distinctly silly to complicate things for such a small piece of
code.
I doubt Kees would mind modularizing it, but it would be nice to
get VFS maintainer feedback in the:
{ 'you are crazy, over my dead body' ... 'cool, merge it' }
continuous spectrum of possible answers.
Thanks,
Ingo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
