Followup to: <Pine.LNX.firstname.lastname@example.org>
By author: Chris Evans <email@example.com>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
> > Conclusion: I do not think it is responsible to introduce such a hazardous
> > feature without giving the rest of the world a reasonable amount of time
> > to adapt.
> I agree. Is their strong user demand for this, or are we doing it "just
> because we can"? If the latter then I suggest we keep the feature but
> restore sys_mount() such that the first line is "if
> !capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN) :-)
There is definitely strong demand for this; for the past few years I
have gotten this request on the autofs mailing list several times a
month. It's a great win, but yes, it needs to be privileged.
-- <firstname.lastname@example.org> at work, <email@example.com> in private! "Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jun 07 2000 - 21:00:16 EST