[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120322055354.GA3942@avionic-0098.mockup.avionic-design.de>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 06:53:54 +0100
From: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...onic-design.de>
To: Ted Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext2: Don't export ext2_mask_flags() to user space
* Ted Ts'o wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 11:23:57PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> > Frankly, anybody seriously wanting to do anything with ext[2-4]
> > filesystems should use header files as provided by libext2fs. So I wonder
> > if just unexporting the whole file wouldn't be the best solution going
> > forward. Ted, do you have opinion?
>
> Agreed, it's been almost 8 years since e2fsprogs used the
> include/linux/ext2_fs.h (the last version that needed it was e2fsprogs
> 1.35, released February 28, 2004).
>
> There shouldn't be *anyone* using any of the ext2/3/4 kernel header
> files. The only program that might be cheating and using kernel
> header files is ext3grep, as the author wasn't willing to fix his
> applications to use libext2fs. (As a result, it doesn't work on ext4
> file systems, where as properly coded programs that do use libext2fs
> often work just fine on ext4, such as e2tools, which hasn't been
> modified for something like eight years but which works on ext4 just
> fine.)
>
> So yeah, I'd just unexport ext2_fs.h, and probably ext3_fs.h as well.
Alright. Do you want me to send a patch to do so?
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?
Thierry
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists