On 2011-11-21 09:13 , Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: > Just out of curiosity, what is the anticipated usage scenario for the > 2nd bullet? Is there another ticket tracking those requirements?
No ticket that I know of. It came up on the list a while back. IIRC there was some port that didn't work right under trace mode, and it looked like it needed to extend the sandbox. I don't remember the details. I do remember there was also talk in that thread of "greylisting" certain files. We definitely want to discourage behaviour in ports that requires poking extra holes in the sandbox, but it's nice to have the option for when it's really needed. Probably the more important aspect is having the rwx granularity, and keeping the (global) paths in a data file instead of inline in the source code in two different places. - Josh _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev
