[lkml]   [2001]   [Oct]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Security question: "Text file busy" overwriting executables but not shared libraries?
Richard Gooch <> writes:

|> Linus Torvalds writes:
|> >
|> > On 4 Oct 2001, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
|> > >
|> > > First what user space really wants is the MAP_COPY. Which is
|> > > MAP_PRIVATE with the guarantee that they don't see anyone else's changes.
|> >
|> > Which is a completely idiotic idea, and which is only just another
|> > example of how absolutely and stunningly _stupid_ Hurd is.
|> Indeed. If you're updated a shared library, why not *create a new
|> file* and then rename it?!? That lets running programmes work fine,
|> and new programmes will get the new library. Also, the following
|> construct makes a lot of sense:
|> ld -shared -o *.o || mv /usr/local/lib

That || should be &&, otherwise you are doing exactly the opposite of what
you want.


Andreas Schwab "And now for something completely different."
SuSE Labs, SuSE GmbH, Schanzäckerstr. 10, D-90443 Nürnberg
Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
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: 2005-03-22 13:04    [W:0.106 / U:0.212 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site