lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [May]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC] AT_NO_JUMPS/LOOKUP_NO_JUMPS
On Sun 2017-03-19 17:24:15, Al Viro wrote:
> Bringing back an old conversation - what do you think about the
> potential usefulness of the following ...at() option:
> * no mountpoint crossings allowed (mount --bind included)

Returning error or returning the object that should be hidden by the
mount?

I believe the second option would be a bit dangerous...
Pavel

--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-05-02 21:58    [W:0.058 / U:0.012 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site