[lkml]   [2006]   [May]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 4/9] namespaces: utsname: switch to using uts namespaces
    "Randy.Dunlap" <> writes:

    > On Thu, 18 May 2006 10:49:36 -0500 Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
    >> Replace references to system_utsname to the per-process uts namespace
    >> where appropriate. This includes things like uname.
    >> Changes: Per Eric Biederman's comments, use the per-process uts namespace
    >> for ELF_PLATFORM, sunrpc, and parts of net/ipv4/ipconfig.c
    >> Signed-off-by: Serge E. Hallyn <>

    > OK, here's my big comment/question. I want to see <nodename> increased to
    > 256 bytes (per current POSIX), so each field of struct <variant>_utsname
    > needs be copied individually (I think) instead of doing a single
    > struct copy.

    Where is it specified? Looking at the spec as SUSV3 I don't see a size
    specified for nodename.

    > I've been working on this for the past few weeks (among other
    > things). Sorry about the timing.
    > I could send patches for this against mainline in a few days,
    > but I'll be glad to listen to how it would be easiest for all of us
    > to handle.
    > I'm probably a little over half done with my patches.
    > They will end up adding a lib/utsname.c that has functions for:
    > put_oldold_uname() // to user
    > put_old_uname() // to user
    > put_new_uname() // to user
    > put_posix_uname() // to user

    Sounds reasonable, if we really need a 256 byte nodename.

    As long as they take a pointer to the appropriate utsname
    structure these patches should not fundamentally conflict.


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

     \ /
      Last update: 2006-05-19 11:09    [W:0.021 / U:73.480 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site