Re: PATCH: O_NOFOLLOW? (was "Linux 2.1.125 doesn't dump core on SIGSEGV")

David Woodhouse (David.Woodhouse@mvhi.com)
Wed, 21 Oct 1998 09:27:41 +0100

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Jeremy Fitzhardinge: "Re: WINMODEM driver"
Previous message: Chris Wedgwood: "PATCH(es): root coredump fix, O_NOFOLLOW, safer coredump"
Maybe in reply to: Chris Wedgwood: "PATCH: O_NOFOLLOW? (was "Linux 2.1.125 doesn't dump core on SIGSEGV")"

chris@cybernet.co.nz said:
> On Wed, Oct 21, 1998 at 01:40:43AM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > You do want to modify fs/open.c so that O_NOFOLLOW is removed from
> > the flags after open() time, though, as with all the other such
> > flags.

> Yes... I missed that (I'm actually not sure why this is necessary

AFAIK, just for tidiness - so that those flags don't appear when you call
fcntl(F_GETFL)

---- ---- ----
David Woodhouse David.Woodhouse@mvhi.com Office: (+44) 1223 810302
Project Leader, Process Information Systems Mobile: (+44) 976 658355
Axiom (Cambridge) Ltd., Swaffham Bulbeck, Cambridge, CB5 0NA, UK.
finger dwmw2@ferret.lmh.ox.ac.uk for PGP key.

-
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/

Next message: Jeremy Fitzhardinge: "Re: WINMODEM driver"
Previous message: Chris Wedgwood: "PATCH(es): root coredump fix, O_NOFOLLOW, safer coredump"
Maybe in reply to: Chris Wedgwood: "PATCH: O_NOFOLLOW? (was "Linux 2.1.125 doesn't dump core on SIGSEGV")"