Re: [PATCH -mm 0/7] execns syscall and user namespace

From: Ulrich Drepper
Date: Tue Jul 11 2006 - 20:15:19 EST


On 7/11/06, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> #define EXECVEF_NEWNS 0x00000100
> #define EXECVEF_NEWIPC 0x00000200
> #define EXECVEF_NEWUTS 0x00000400
> #define EXECVEF_NEWUSER 0x00000800

Yes on these.


If flags comes first, I would rather like to call it execfve(), or
perhaps execxve() ("extended") or execove() ("options"). execfve()
sounds like it executes a file descriptor (which would probably be
called fexecve()).

I think execfve is fine.


Perhaps more seriously, if we're adding more functionality already, it
should acquire -at functionality (execveat) and take a directory argument.

We have fexecve already. Adding -at variants is probably not the best
idea, it's confusing. Note, that fexecve only takes a file
descriptor, not a file descriptor plus file name.

The only reason I could see for changing this is thatfexecve depends
on /proc. But there is so much other functionality which won't work
if /proc isn't mounted that I'd rank this low. I'm fine with just
adding execfve.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/