[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c2b6e4d1-10a8-6ff7-44c9-55fe10fc7bb3@landley.net>
Date: Sat, 11 May 2019 23:12:44 -0500
From: Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...wei.com>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
LSM List <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-integrity <linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org>,
initramfs@...r.kernel.org, Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
silviu.vlasceanu@...wei.com, dmitry.kasatkin@...wei.com,
takondra@...co.com, kamensky@...co.com,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
james.w.mcmechan@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] initramfs: add support for xattrs in the initial
ram disk
On 5/11/19 11:04 PM, Rob Landley wrote:
> P.P.S. Sadly, if you want an actually standardized standard format where
> implementations adhere to the standard: IETF RFC 1991 was published in 1996 and
Nope, darn it, checked my notes and that wasn't it. I thought zip had an RFC,
it's just zlib, deflate, and gzip, and that's not the number of any of them.
I still think sticking with a lightly modified cpio makes the most sense,
just... in band signalling that _doesn't_ solve the y2038 problem, the file size
limit, or address sparse files seems kinda silly.
Rob
Powered by blists - more mailing lists