Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2013 22:05:03 -0500 From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...il.com> To: Rich Felker <dalias@...ifal.cx> Cc: libc-alpha <libc-alpha@...rceware.org>, musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: O_EXEC and O_SEARCH > I'd like to have a conversation with the glibc team about O_EXEC and > O_SEARCH in the interest of hopefully developing a unified plan for > supporting them on Linux. Presumably the reason glibc still does not > have them is that Linux O_PATH does not exactly match their semantics > in some cases, and O_PATH is sufficiently broken on many kernel > versions to make offering it problematic. In particular, current > coreutils break badly on most kernel versions around 2.6.39-3.6 or so > if O_SEARCH and O_EXEC are defined as O_PATH. I'm curious why don't you implement them in kernel directly?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.