lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Jul]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [NFS] [PATCH] Bug in NFS - should umask be allowed to set umask???
From
Date
>>>>> " " == Alan Cox <alan@redhat.com> writes:

>> 1/ Claim that redhat is broken. Leave them to fix SysVinit. 2/
>> Have nfsd over-write the umask setting that /sbin/init imposed.
>> This is effectively what your patch does. 3/ Decide that it is
>> inappropriate for nfsd to share the current->fs fs_struct with
>> init. Unfortunately this means changing or replacing
>> daemonize().

> #3 seems right. Of course its not clear whose fs struct should
> #be shared

Well, you can either use the fs_struct from init, or that of the first
process to call nfsd. I'm not sure if there's any real point in having
a chrooted nfsd, but it's easy to implement.

In either case, the principle is the same: use copy_fs_struct() on
whatever you want to clone, then have all the nfsd daemons and the
lockd daemon attach to the new shared fs_struct when they get set up.
No need to replace daemonize...

Cheers,
Trond
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:57    [W:0.085 / U:0.016 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site