On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 9:50 PM, Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 09, 2015 at 04:28:52PM -0500, Rich Felker wrote: > >> The "magic open-once magic symlink" approach is really the cleanest >> solution I can find. In the case where the interpreter does not open >> the script, nothing terribly bad happens; the magic symlink just >> sticks around until _exit or exec. In the case where the interpreter >> opens it more than once, you get a failure, but as far as I know >> existing interpreters don't do this, and it's arguably bad design. In >> any case it's a caught error. > > You know what's cleaner than that? git revert 27d6ec7ad > It has just been merged; until 3.19 it's fair game for removal. > > And yes, I should've NAKed the damn thing loud and clear, rather than > asking questions back then, getting no answers and letting it slip. > Mea culpa. Al, I'm sorry if I missed a question or concern of yours back in October -- I certainly didn't intend to (that would be foolish indeed!). [I thought the main open question was whether a dupfs implementation would help with /dev/fd/ and /proc/ semantics, but I had the (possibly incorrect) understanding that that was somewhat orthogonal to the execveat implementation.] Are there any changes/fixes/refactorings that I could do (especially within the 3.19 timeframe) that would help mollify at all? > 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. Not me! -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
