>Theo de Raadt wrote:
>> So let's just split these cases out. "ioctl"'s number gets reused for
>> tape, and a new "bpf" promise is added.. That paves the way for a
>> more complex diff coming in a few hours.
>
>The mention of bpf made me worried that dhclient would be affected, but I
>checked
Theo de Raadt wrote:
> So let's just split these cases out. "ioctl"'s number gets reused for
> tape, and a new "bpf" promise is added.. That paves the way for a
> more complex diff coming in a few hours.
The mention of bpf made me worried that dhclient would be affected, but I
checked and it's
> From: Theo de Raadt
> Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 20:52:14 -0700
>
> Early during pledge development the "ioctl" promise was a kitchen
> sink of options until we could differentiate use cases, identify
> common patterns, and then create domain-specific promises.
>
> only 4
Early during pledge development the "ioctl" promise was a kitchen
sink of options until we could differentiate use cases, identify
common patterns, and then create domain-specific promises.
only 4 cases remain of "ioctl" remain:
- pax/tar/cpio experience great difficulty finding tape drives