Re: proposed patch to rpcbind to provide finer-grained security controls than offered by the -i option

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

 



On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 12:01:51PM -0500, Chuck Lever wrote:
> If we go with just the evidence at hand: Andrew says he can rebuild his application.  Thus, so far there is no specific requirement to expand "-i".  IMO we should wait until there is, in the most noble of Linux traditions.
> 

To be fair, this will require porting work on my side.  It is not a completely
trivial recompile, since some of the data structures have changed a little
bit.

I don't know whether removing from glibc is a great idea because of this
aspect.  The new TIRPC code is not 100% compatible (for example, struct XDR has
some differences in the xdr_ops).  I personally think that adding
'__attribute__ (( __deprecated__ ))' to all the function prototypes in
/usr/include/rpc/*.h would be a good first step, and also add a comment to the
header files directing people to port their code to the new tirpc API.

Anyway, that's my 2 cents.

Regards,
Andy
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux USB Development]     [Linux Media Development]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Info]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux