[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150109223300.GO22149@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2015 22:33:00 +0000
From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To: Rich Felker <dalias@...ifal.cx>
Cc: David Drysdale <drysdale@...gle.com>,
"Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Meredydd Luff <meredydd@...atehouse.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
sparclinux@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv10 man-pages 5/5] execveat.2: initial man page for
execveat(2)
On Fri, Jan 09, 2015 at 05:17:28PM -0500, Rich Felker wrote:
> > Back then the procfs-free environments had been pushed as a serious argument
> > in favour of merging the damn thing. Now you guys turn around and say that
> > we not only need procfs mounted, we need a yet-to-be-added kludge in there
> > to cope with the actual intended uses.
>
> Reverting does not fix the problem. There is no way to make fexecve
> work for scripts without kernel support, and the needed kernel support
> without fexecve would be even nastier, since handling of /proc/self/fd
> magic-symlinks would need to be special-cased. The added fexecveat
> syscall supports fully /proc-less operation for non-scripts.
Oh, yes it does. It's not *our* problem if it's out of tree and not
a part of ABI. That way if you need it, *you* get to come up with clean
implementation. If it's in-tree you get leverage to push ugly kludges
further in. And frankly, I don't trust you to abstain from using that
leverage in rather nasty ways.
Out of curiosity, how would you expect that "open only once" to work?
All reliable variants I see are beyond sick...
--
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