Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 10 Mar 2005 11:56:45 -0500 (EST) | From | Bill Davidsen <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] make st seekable again |
| |
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.
None of the choices is good; I see: - leave it the way it is - fix the hole and break tar - wait for FSF to fix tar, then fix the hole - try to fix it without breaking tar, which may not be really possible and could leave part of the problem and still break tar somehow - fix it, and leave the admin a way to build a kernel with the hole other than just reverting the fix
I proposed the last, I won't cry if no one else likes it, it just seemed realistic for people who don't use certain features of tar.
-- bill davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com> CTO, TMR Associates, Inc Doing interesting things with little computers since 1979.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |