Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] fscrypt: Have filesystems handle their d_ops

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



>
> This change has the side-effect of removing the capability of the root
> directory from being case-insensitive.  It is not a backward
> incompatible change because there is no way to make the root directory
> CI at the moment (it is never empty). But this restriction seems
> artificial. Is there a real reason to prevent the root inode from being
> case-insensitive?

> I don't have a use case where I need a root directory to be CI.  In
> fact, when I first implemented CI, I did want to block the root directory
> from being made CI, just to prevent people from doing "chattr +F /" and
> complaining afterwards when /usr/lib breaks.
>
> My concern with the curent patch was whether this side-effect was
> considered, but I'm happy with either semantics.
>
> --
> Gabriel Krisman Bertazi

That's just from the lost+found directory right? If you remove it you
can still change it, and then add the lost+found directory back. Isn't
that how it works currently? I definitely didn't intend to change any
behavior around non-encrypted casefolding there.

I should look at what fsck does if you do that and have a LoSt+fOuNd folder...


-Daniel Rosenberg



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]

  Powered by Linux