lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Thu, 22 Mar 2012 17:47:51 +0100
From:	Thierry Reding <>
To:	Ted Ts'o <>, Artem Bityutskiy <>,
	Jan Kara <>,,
	Al Viro <>,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext2: Don't export ext2_mask_flags() to user space

* Ted Ts'o wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 08:00:41AM +0200, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
> > On Thu, 2012-03-22 at 06:53 +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > > What's the recommended fix for packages that cannot or will not use
> > > libext2fs, like busybox? Copy the required parts into a private header
> > > and use that instead?
> > 
> > The normal way is to just keep a private copy of the whole header file.
> > Because the on-disk format stays compatible, those programs do not have
> > to update the header very often - only rarely if they want to support
> > some new feature.
> Even if they're not iwlling to use libext2fs (for space reasons, I
> would assume?  It can't be because of license compatibility issues
> since they are both GPLv2), they could just simply grab the ext2_fs.h
> from e2fsprogs.  That has all of the file system definitions for ext2,
> ext3, and ext4.

In fact there is already a file, e2fs_defs.h, that seems to be based on the
contents of the ext2_fs.h from the kernel. I've posted two patches to the
busybox mailing list that fix the build without using linux/ext2_fs.h. For
reference, they can be found here:

Do you still want me to prepare a patch to unexport ext2_fs.h or will you
take care of it?


Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped

Powered by blists - more mailing lists