linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 0/7] [RFC] cramfs: fake write support

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <20080601162459.GB13094@logfs.org>
Date:	Sun, 1 Jun 2008 18:25:00 +0200
From:	Jörn Engel <joern@...fs.org>
To:	David Newall <davidn@...idnewall.com>
Cc:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, hch@....de
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/7] [RFC] cramfs: fake write support

On Sun, 1 June 2008 15:32:50 +0930, David Newall wrote:
> 
> I've not used unionfs (nor aufs) so I'm not aware of its foibles, but I
> can say that it's the right kind of solution.  Rather than spend effort
> implementing write support for read-only filesystems, why not put your
> time into fixing whatever you see wrong with one or both of those?

There is a strong argument to be made for fixing some problem once
instead of N times.  But when that solution is M times more complicated,
with M being significantly larger than N, said argument becomes rather
weak.

And having looked at unionfs, I claim that your argument is paper-thin.

Jörn

-- 
/* Keep these two variables together */
int bar;
--
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/