Hi Craig, On 1 March 2016 at 16:51, Craig Gallek <kraigatgoog@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 5:29 AM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) > <mtk.manpages@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 03/01/2016 11:10 AM, Vincent Bernat wrote: >>> ❦ 1 mars 2016 11:03 +0100, "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@xxxxxxxxx> : >> Once the SO_LOCK_FILTER option has been enabled, >> attempts to change or remove the filter attached to a >> socket, or to disable the SO_LOCK_FILTER option will >> fail with the error EPERM. >> >> I think the second paragraph should probably drop mention of privileges, >> right? In fact, maybe just drop the paragraph altogether? > Thanks Michael, all of your changes in the git tree look good to me. I > parsed the one-way nature of LOCK_FILTER completely backwards from the > commit message. Actually, so did I initially. Something in the wording there tripped us both up. But then when I looked in the code, I could find no check for capabilities. So I eventually went back and reparsed the commit message correctly :-). > It's describing BSD's root-modify behavior, not the > implementation in Linux. I think I like this last paragraph as you > have it to explicitly call out this as intended behavior. Okay. But, what about the second paragraph mentioned in my other mail. I think we should just kill it. What do you think? Cheers, Michael -- Michael Kerrisk Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/ Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
