| lists.openwall.net | 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 linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-Id: <1157425739.5510.40.camel@localhost> Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2006 23:08:58 -0400 From: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@....uio.no> To: Shaya Potter <spotter@...columbia.edu> Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.cz>, Josef Sipek <jsipek@...sunysb.edu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, hch@...radead.org, akpm@...l.org, viro@....linux.org.uk Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/22][RFC] Unionfs: Stackable Namespace Unification Filesystem On Mon, 2006-09-04 at 09:28 -0400, Shaya Potter wrote: > On Sun, 2006-09-03 at 11:05 +0000, Pavel Machek wrote: > > Hi! > > > > > - Modifying a Unionfs branch directly, while the union is mounted, is > > > currently unsupported. Any such change may cause Unionfs to oops and it > > > can even result in data loss! > > > > I'm not sure if that is acceptable. Even root user should be unable to > > oops the kernel using 'normal' actions. > > As I said in the other case. imagine ext2/3 on a a san file system > where 2 systems try to make use of it. Will they not have issues? Yes, but you are deliberately ignoring that NAS systems like CIFS or NFS don't, and neither do clustered filesystems. Users of those systems don't expect them to have issues with that sort of scenario. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists