Hello!
> I bet you'd say that sys_rm_rf SHOULD NOT exist.
>
> Now, by your (and everyone elses) argument, we can do the same thing
> via the /dev/ioport device, so its ok to have sys_rm_rf included in
> the kernel.
>
> This is the EXACT same argument that Andre/lkml is fighting over.
> Either you accept both arguments or neither argument. IMHO you'd have
> to be really stupid to accept neither argument. Choosing to accept one
> argument and not the other is not only inconsistent, but non-sensible
> and you should probably be shipped off to see the men in white coats.
I think that a better analogue for the check proposed by Andre is "implement
sys_rm_rf, but make it check whether the path we are passing to it is not
/, /bin or /sbin". :-)
Have a nice fortnight
-- Martin `MJ' Mares <mj@ucw.cz> <mj@suse.cz> http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~mj/ "Current root password is "p3s5vwF50". Keep secret."- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jul 23 2000 - 21:00:18 EST