From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932081AbWDEVvG (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Apr 2006 17:51:06 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932085AbWDEVvF (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Apr 2006 17:51:05 -0400 Received: from mta09-winn.ispmail.ntl.com ([81.103.221.49]:42630 "EHLO mtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932081AbWDEVvE (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Apr 2006 17:51:04 -0400 Message-ID: <44343C25.2000306@plan99.net> Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2006 22:52:37 +0100 From: Mike Hearn User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (X11/20051201) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Eric W. Biederman" CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@osdl.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add a /proc/self/exedir link References: <4431A93A.2010702@plan99.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > I think if we can fix namespaces you don't have to be root to use > them that is a superioir approach, and will cover more cases. That would be nice. I assumed they needed root for security reasons rather than architectural reasons. > I have concerns about security policy ... I'm not sure I understand. Only if you run that program, and if you don't have access to the intermediate directory, how do you run it? > This means I can not run any of your relocatable executalbes in > a chroot environment unless I mount proc. Why is mounting proc a bad thing? I have never seen a Linux distro that does not provide proc and many desktop-level things depend on it. > Given how long we have been without this I doubt many people actually > care You could argue the same for any new feature. Writing relocatable software on UNIX is absolutely standard, except it's done at source compile time not runtime. That fits with the traditional UNIX culture of compiling software to install it, but the times they are a changin :) > I'm not certain the directory of an inode even makes sense, and > that is what you are asking for us to export. How so? The code does work, though I guess you could devise a scenario in which there is a running executable that is not attached to any directory. thanks -mike