Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 6 Dec 2000 04:38:14 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 6 Dec 2000 04:38:05 -0500 Received: from leibniz.math.psu.edu ([146.186.130.2]:10743 "EHLO math.psu.edu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 6 Dec 2000 04:37:53 -0500 Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2000 04:07:22 -0500 (EST) From: Alexander Viro To: Tigran Aivazian cc: Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: test12-pre6 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 6 Dec 2000, Tigran Aivazian wrote: > On Wed, 6 Dec 2000, Tigran Aivazian wrote: > > error = -EPERM; > > if (IS_IMMUTABLE(inode) || IS_APPEND(inode)) > > goto dput_and_out; > > also, while we are here -- are you sure that EPERM is a good idea for > IS_IMMUTABLE(inode)? Other parts of Linux return EACCES in this > case. Maybe it would be more consistent to do EACCES here too? This would > simply mean remove IS_IMMUTABLE() from the above if because > vfs_permission() does return -EACCES if we ask MAY_WRITE for IS_IMMUTABLE > inode. > > Since, the SuSv2 standard is silent on the issue of immutable files (they > are Linux-specific) then it may make sense to be consistent? They are not Linux-specific (check where they came from), so I would rather check 4.4BSD and SuSv2[1] be damned. I'll look it up tomorrow, right now I'm going down. Sorry. [1] gotta love the CaPiTaLi2aTi0n, BTW. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/