Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261469AbVDZKlj (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Apr 2005 06:41:39 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261482AbVDZKkr (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Apr 2005 06:40:47 -0400 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:10673 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261469AbVDZKjT (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Apr 2005 06:39:19 -0400 Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 11:38:59 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Andrew Morton Cc: Christoph Hellwig , miklos@szeredi.hu, jamie@shareable.org, linuxram@us.ibm.com, 7eggert@gmx.de, bulb@ucw.cz, viro@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] private mounts Message-ID: <20050426103859.GA31468@infradead.org> Mail-Followup-To: Christoph Hellwig , Andrew Morton , miklos@szeredi.hu, jamie@shareable.org, linuxram@us.ibm.com, 7eggert@gmx.de, bulb@ucw.cz, viro@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <1114445923.4480.94.camel@localhost> <20050425191015.GC28294@mail.shareable.org> <20050426091921.GA29810@infradead.org> <20050426093628.GA30208@infradead.org> <20050426030010.63757c8c.akpm@osdl.org> <20050426100412.GA30762@infradead.org> <20050426031414.260568b5.akpm@osdl.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050426031414.260568b5.akpm@osdl.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 877 Lines: 18 On Tue, Apr 26, 2005 at 03:14:14AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > That's one of the major points of FUSE, isn't it? So that unprivileged > users can do interesting things. > > Or are you saying that that's a desirable objective, but it should be > implemented differently? It's a desirable objective, but the implementation is wrong. If we have a user mount that must be known to the VFS so that the VFS can enforce the right restrictions instead of leaving various crude hacks in lowlevel filesystem drivers. Especially as fuse isn't the only filesystem for which this makes sense - smbfs or v9fs want the same features aswell - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/