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

[Ulrich Drepper]

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/