linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Force UNIX domain sockets to be built in

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

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 31 Dec 2007 15:03:20 +0100 (CET)
From:	Bodo Eggert <7eggert@....de>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
cc:	7eggert@....de, jengelh@...putergmbh.de, devzero@....de,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, bunk@...nel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Force UNIX domain sockets to be built in

On Mon, 31 Dec 2007, David Miller wrote:
> From: Bodo Eggert <7eggert@....de>

> > As suggested by Adrian Bunk, UNIX domain sockets should always be built in 
> > on normal systems. This is especially true since udev needs these sockets
> > and fails to run if UNIX=m.
> > 
> > Signed-Off-By: Bodo Eggert <7eggert@....de>
> 
> People who use udev can make sure they have it built into their kernel
> if they have such a dependency.
> 
> Not everyone uses udev, and therefore needs AF_UNIX non-modular.

That's why I kept this option for embedded folks.

Is there any benefit for non-embedded systems from having UNIX=m?
-- 
Top 100 things you don't want the sysadmin to say:
89. I got a better job at Lockheed...
--
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/