Messages in this thread | | | From | Kay Sievers <> | Date | Mon, 11 May 2009 23:05:59 +0200 | Subject | Re: [patch 00/13] devtmpfs patches |
| |
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 22:41, David P. Quigley <dpquigl@tycho.nsa.gov> wrote:
> This however does highlight a problem with the fact that device node > labeling isn't being done properly. It should be possible to create this > fs with a different name such that it doesn't appear as a tmpfs file > system to SELinux. If it appears as a devtmpfs file system then we can > specify the root label and labels on the other devices properly in > policy.
That could be done, if it solves this problem. Damn, now we have the naming problem back again. :)
By doing its own fstype, we could also make the auto-mount optional, because you could always reach the filesystem anytime later.
A different fstype has the slight inconvenience, that existing userspace needs to be taught to handle it explicitly, while a tmfps is already handled automatically because we use tmpfs already today. But that may not be too important.
Thanks a lot for your tests and analysis, Kay
| |