Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 4 May 1999 12:07:25 +0200 | From | Pavel Machek <> | Subject | Re: Capabilities: ALPHA time |
| |
> > On 30-Apr-99 Pavel Machek wrote: > > Hi! > > > > Capabilities reached state where they are actually usefull. (I was > > able to lower permissions for programs like ping and rlogin). There > > are still some problems with headers (I include > > /usr/src/linux/include/linux/capability.h directly -- that's ugly), > > and there are problems with applications which do getuid() and then > > print failed - must be run as root when they actually do not need root > > at all (fping). Diff against kernel follows, and diff against > > http://www.goop.org/~jeremy/elf-caps.html follows, too (Jeremy, please > > apply at least parts which look clean to you). > > Your way of parsing an executable for notes is very fragile. I've posted a > much better patch a couple of times - see > http://www/~jeremy/caps/binfmt_elf.c.diff
Well, I'm still not sure your patch is better. I've seen it and it is much more complicated. _If_ we want to support multiple different CAPS notes with different versions simultaneously, _then_ your patch is the way to go.I'm just not sure having multiple CAPS notes is good idea: it makes kernel code more complicated, it is hard to imagine interface to manipulate such multiple capabilities, and I do not think it is neccessary at all. [You want single capabilities per executable, not arbitrary number of capabilities. The later is too hard to use for use and unneccessary, IMO.]
Pavel -- The best software in life is free (not shareware)! Pavel GCM d? s-: !g p?:+ au- a--@ w+ v- C++@ UL+++ L++ N++ E++ W--- M- Y- R+
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |