| 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: <20080801193505.GS28946@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2008 20:35:05 +0100 From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk> To: Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Containers <containers@...ts.osdl.org>, Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>, Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org> Subject: Re: Per-instance devpts On Fri, Aug 01, 2008 at 12:23:44PM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote: > On Fri, 2008-08-01 at 11:12 -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > 1. /dev/ptmx would have to change to a symlink, ptmx -> pts/ptmx. > ... > > I worry #1 would have substantial user-space impact, but I don't see a > > way around it, since there would be no obvious way to associate > > /dev/ptmx with a filesystem. > > Are your worries just about replacing what is now a normal file with a > symlink, and the behavioral changes that come with that? > > I wonder if using a bind mount for the file would be more robust. We > wouldn't, of course, be able to do it persistently, but I bet it would > be something we could count on udev to do for us. Not on my boxen. However, devpts tends to be mounted by initscripts, which is where one would naturally do that. -- 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