linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/7] overlay filesystem: request for inclusion

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]

Date:	Fri, 08 Jul 2011 14:57:09 +0200
From:	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To:	"Hans-Peter Jansen" <hpj@...la.net>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, apw@...onical.com, nbd@...nwrt.org,
	neilb@...e.de, hramrach@...trum.cz, jordipujolp@...il.com,
	ezk@....cs.sunysb.edu, hooanon05@...oo.co.jp
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] overlay filesystem: request for inclusion

"Hans-Peter Jansen" <hpj@...la.net> writes:

> All kodos to you, Miklos. While I'm still missing a major feature from 
> overlayfs that is a NFS as upper layer, it provides a fairly good 
> start. A commitment from you, that such an extension is considered for 
> inclusion - given, that it appears one day - is appreciated. Also, 
> since xattr support is available for NFS,

AFAIK development of generic xattr support on NFS stopped some time ago.

> it would be nice to outline, what is missing for such an
> implementation from overlayfs's POV.

Allow using namspace polluting xattr replacements, such as aufs is
doing.

But why?  Why is it better to do the overlaying on the client instead of
the server?

Thanks,
Miklos
--
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/