On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 01:43:58AM +0300, Solar Designer wrote: > As to (not) introducing fsync() calls into pam_unix specifically, I > don't have strong feelings for or against this, although it is OK to do > in order to be extra-safe on some modern filesystems other than ext4. Update: in a private e-mail, Ted has kindly pointed out to me that "XFS does not have the workaround for rename(), so it would be a good thing for pam_unix to add the fsync()." I was not aware of this specific example. I agree that this is a good enough reason to add the fsync() calls in Linux-PAM. Alexander _______________________________________________ Pam-list mailing list Pam-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pam-list
