Re: [PATCH] make st seekable again

From: Arjan van de Ven
Date: Thu Mar 10 2005 - 12:36:36 EST

On Thu, 2005-03-10 at 11:56 -0500, Bill Davidsen wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Mar 2005, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > > critical user data.
> > >
> > > In other words, it should work correctly or not at all. At the least this
> > > should be a config option, like UNSAFE_TAPE_POSITIONING or some such.
> > > And show the option if the build includes BROKEN features. That should put
> > > the decision where it belongs and clarify the possible failures.
> >
> > CONFIG_SECURITY_HOLES doesn't make sense.
> > Better to just fix the security holes instead.
> I think you're an idealist. If this were something other than tar it would
> be simple, and you would be right. Well, you ARE right, but a change which
> breaks tar, which many sites use for backups, is really not practical,
> without a loophole until tar gets fixed. And as Alan noted, keeping track
> of the physical position is very hard, and getting a tar fix might take a
> while.

No the problem is that the *st* code has a security hole. THAT is the
problem. Not that it would be seekable. But how it implements the seeks.
THAT part is the problem. And THAT can be fixed.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at