linux-kernel - Re: /etc/fstab.d yes or not

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: <20120123220720.1b2e9663@pyramind.ukuu.org.uk>
Date:	Mon, 23 Jan 2012 22:07:20 +0000
From:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:	Theodore Tso <tytso@....EDU>
Cc:	Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>,
	Roger Leigh <rleigh@...elibre.net>,
	Karel Zak <kzak@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, util-linux@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: /etc/fstab.d yes or not

On Mon, 23 Jan 2012 08:55:21 -0500
Theodore Tso <tytso@....EDU> wrote:

> I am extremely dubious about systemd, and would much rather it not be on any system that *I* run (and using UUID's to identify kernel notification is just whacko) , but I have to agree with Kay in that /etc/fstab.d is Just Wrong.   The /etc/fstab file is parsed by many programs, shell scripts, and not just the ones in util-linux.   We should consider it an ABI, and not mess with it.

Pedantically speaking /etc/fstab is not API, getmntent is API.

In practical terms though it would be very 'interesting' to implement
getmentent with an fstab.d, if not down right impossible because the
argument is a FILE *.

So with a good coding hat on - please don't consider fstab API, it's got
a programming interface 8). Otherwise I agree fstab.d is wrong.

Alan
--
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/