Hey Linus, Marcelo and the rest of you.
The code mentioned in the subject does not seem to have a maintainer. I sent the patch to those mentioned
in lmc_main.c, and from Andrew Stanley-Jones I got the following answer:
"I'm not sure it's really being maintained, but I was the last one to work
on it afaik. Feel free to apply it.
-Andrew"
So I guess, if the patch looks good, it is just for you to apply it ... it is against 2.5.1-pre5, but should
apply cleanly to 2.4 as well ...
== Morten
--
mvh
Morten Helgesen
UNIX System Administrator & C Developer
Nextframe AS
[email protected] / 93445641
http://www.nextframe.net
--- /usr/src/linux-2.5.1-pre5/drivers/net/wan/lmc/lmc_main.c Fri Sep 14 01:04:43 2001
+++ /usr/src/patched-linux-2.5.1-pre5/drivers/net/wan/lmc/lmc_main.c Thu Dec 6 13:17:21 2001
@@ -176,7 +176,7 @@
case LMCIOCSINFO: /*fold01*/
sp = &((struct ppp_device *) dev)->sppp;
- if (!suser ()) {
+ if (!capable(CAP_NET_ADMIN)) {
ret = -EPERM;
break;
}
@@ -211,7 +211,7 @@
u_int16_t old_type = sc->if_type;
u_int16_t new_type;
- if (!suser ()) {
+ if (!capable(CAP_NET_ADMIN)) {
ret = -EPERM;
break;
}
@@ -291,7 +291,7 @@
break;
case LMCIOCCLEARLMCSTATS: /*fold01*/
- if (!suser ()){
+ if (!capable(CAP_NET_ADMIN)){
ret = -EPERM;
break;
}
@@ -305,7 +305,7 @@
break;
case LMCIOCSETCIRCUIT: /*fold01*/
- if (!suser ()){
+ if (!capable(CAP_NET_ADMIN)){
ret = -EPERM;
break;
}
@@ -323,7 +323,7 @@
break;
case LMCIOCRESET: /*fold01*/
- if (!suser ()){
+ if (!capable(CAP_NET_ADMIN)){
ret = -EPERM;
break;
}
@@ -356,7 +356,7 @@
{
struct lmc_xilinx_control xc; /*fold02*/
- if (!suser ()){
+ if (!capable(CAP_NET_ADMIN)){
ret = -EPERM;
break;
}