From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <90ae5a0975174f463f066e8be24438f5@vitanuova.com>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] Novice question - run as other
From: rog@vitanuova.com
In-Reply-To: <200403171800.i2HI0jtq086906@adat.davidashen.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 19:34:28 +0000
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 34981d68-eacd-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

> A more general conclusion is that for tasks where writing to
> or reading from files reflects or affects process space, and not
> name space, rc is not suitable and C code must be written.

that's not necessarily the case - only for something that changes
something in the writing process that isn't inherited by child
processes.

quite a few devices use this hack, often for efficiency reasons.

ones i'm aware of include (aspects of) srv(3), ssl(3), tls(3), ip(3),
cap(3), fs(3), dup(3) and cons(3)