Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 11 Jul 2006 17:16:46 -0700 | From | "Ulrich Drepper" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH -mm 0/7] execns syscall and user namespace |
| |
On 7/11/06, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote: > > #define EXECVEF_NEWNS 0x00000100 > > #define EXECVEF_NEWIPC 0x00000200 > > #define EXECVEF_NEWUTS 0x00000400 > > #define EXECVEF_NEWUSER 0x00000800
Yes on these.
> If flags comes first, I would rather like to call it execfve(), or > perhaps execxve() ("extended") or execove() ("options"). execfve() > sounds like it executes a file descriptor (which would probably be > called fexecve()).
I think execfve is fine.
> Perhaps more seriously, if we're adding more functionality already, it > should acquire -at functionality (execveat) and take a directory argument.
We have fexecve already. Adding -at variants is probably not the best idea, it's confusing. Note, that fexecve only takes a file descriptor, not a file descriptor plus file name.
The only reason I could see for changing this is thatfexecve depends on /proc. But there is so much other functionality which won't work if /proc isn't mounted that I'd rank this low. I'm fine with just adding execfve. - 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/
| |