From: Rich Felker <dalias@aerifal.cx>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com>
Cc: libc-alpha <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>, musl@lists.openwall.com
Subject: Re: O_EXEC and O_SEARCH
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2013 22:17:09 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130223031708.GU20323@brightrain.aerifal.cx> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHGf_=qr7Uq+KwXFnkjKzFduFYcPz8rzxRQ1x_4JUARha3XyQw@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 10:05:03PM -0500, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > I'd like to have a conversation with the glibc team about O_EXEC and
> > O_SEARCH in the interest of hopefully developing a unified plan for
> > supporting them on Linux. Presumably the reason glibc still does not
> > have them is that Linux O_PATH does not exactly match their semantics
> > in some cases, and O_PATH is sufficiently broken on many kernel
> > versions to make offering it problematic. In particular, current
> > coreutils break badly on most kernel versions around 2.6.39-3.6 or so
> > if O_SEARCH and O_EXEC are defined as O_PATH.
>
> I'm curious why don't you implement them in kernel directly?
See this thread for Linus's opinion on why O_SEARCH was not added:
http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.file-systems/33611
O_NODE seems to have been renamed to O_PATH, or perhaps O_PATH was a
later independent implementation of the same idea; it's not clear to
me which happened. But the idea is that the kernel folks did not want
to do O_SEARCH and O_EXEC properly in kernelspace but instead wanted
to provide a more general flag that could be used to implement both
O_SEARCH and O_EXEC.
Rich
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-02-23 3:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-02-22 0:45 Rich Felker
2013-02-23 3:05 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2013-02-23 3:17 ` Rich Felker [this message]
2013-02-23 3:58 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2013-02-23 4:33 ` Rich Felker
2013-02-23 5:01 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2013-02-23 5:05 ` Rich Felker
2013-02-23 5:21 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2013-02-23 4:54 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2013-02-23 5:03 ` Rich Felker
2013-02-23 5:20 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2013-02-23 5:28 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20130223031708.GU20323@brightrain.aerifal.cx \
--to=dalias@aerifal.cx \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
--cc=musl@lists.openwall.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.vuxu.org/mirror/musl/
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).