Messages in this thread |  | | Subject | Re: modutils, the next generation | Date | Wed, 15 Jan 1997 11:05:11 PST | From | Tim Wright <> |
| |
Martin, you can call me paranoid, but if you have a random object file and you don't know what it is, I'd question your sanity if you think it's a good idea to just insmod it regardless of the name (.o/.klm/.destroy_my_machine) :-)
Surely you keep your kernel modules in a (secure) well known location ???
t
In message <9701151830.AA01618@dcl.MIT.EDU>,"Theodore Y. Ts'o" writes: > Date: Wed, 15 Jan 97 11:11 MET > From: Martin Buck <Martin-2.Buck@student.uni-ulm.de> > > Yes, but wouldn't it be nice to see whether an object file actually is a > kernel module before you try to insmod it? Of course, you could use nm and > look for the required symbols, but making it obvious from the filename > looks like a good idea to me. Please note that I'm not talking about sanit > y > checks insmod has to do; all I want is to make it easier for the user to > distinguish between normal object files and objects files that can be > loaded into a kernel. > > Right now kernel modules are in well-defined places in the filesystem. > (/lib/modules, etc.) So while I see your point, I'm not sure how much > different it really makes in the actual practice. > > - Ted > -- Tim Wright, Worldwide Technical Services, | Email: timw@sequent.com Sequent Computer Systems Inc., 15450, | SW Koll Parkway, Beaverton, Oregon 97006 | Phone: +1-503-578-3822 "Applying computer technology is simply finding the right wrench to pound in the correct screw"
|  |