Chuck Robey wrote: > > I think Garrett's fears are of folks unwittingly wedging machines too > easily, so real mandatory locking ought to be restricted to programs > that root can set up. And those fears are well-founded, but your proposed solution just creates another set of bottlenecks. Making mandatory locks available to any process and giving root an avenue by which it can revoke the locks, by whatever means, is a better solution. SIGKILL seems like an ideal candidate to me. -- "Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?" Wes Peters Softweyr LLC http://softweyr.com/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
- Re: Mandatory locking? Daniel C. Sobral
- Re: Mandatory locking? Garance A Drosihn
- Re: Mandatory locking? Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: Mandatory locking? Greg Lehey
- Re: Mandatory locking? Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: Mandatory locking? Greg Lehey
- Re: Mandatory locking? Ville-Pertti Keinonen
- Re: Mandatory locking? Chuck Robey
- Re: Mandatory locking? Garance A Drosihn
- Re: Mandatory locking? Chuck Robey
- Re: Mandatory locking? Wes Peters
- Re: Mandatory locking? Ville-Pertti Keinonen
- Re: Mandatory locking? Daniel C. Sobral
- Re: Mandatory locking? Garance A Drosihn
- Re: Mandatory locking? Christopher Masto
- Re: Mandatory locking? Chuck Robey
- Re: Mandatory locking? Christopher Masto
- Re: Mandatory locking? Chuck Robey
- Re: Mandatory locking? Christopher Masto
- Re: Mandatory locking? Greg Lehey
- Re: Mandatory locking? Daniel C. Sobral