an alternative is just to have an exclude file listing files/directories that cannot be read or walked to.
brucee On 15 February 2016 at 12:05, arisawa <aris...@ar.aichi-u.ac.jp> wrote: > Hello, > > > 2016/02/15 7:57、Charles Forsyth <charles.fors...@gmail.com> のメール： > > > > > > On 14 February 2016 at 16:38, <cinap_len...@felloff.net> wrote: > > i could imagine the filtering being usefull when cpu'ing to foreign > machines, > > as a server can easily compromize your system when cpu exports your whole > > local namespace > > > > You'd still be better off using a custom nsfile to control it, running > that cpu in > > a more restricted name space from the start, so leaks are impossible. > > filtering of exportfs is handy if it works well. > for example, assume we want to exclude all files of name that begins with > “.”, > then it is probably difficult to do so using only nsfile. > > the “+” filtering is almost useless. > it will not be difficult to rewrite the current code so that we have > better matching rule. > (I think ordering of pattern sequence should be used in evaluation.) > however the change may break something others. > (but I doubt the “+” filtering is really used) > > > >
