> > There's
> > nothing magic about that. It's as if it was N different servers for N
> > different clients, only more effective.
>
> Not entirely, there is a UID dependancy.
Ahh, so there is.
Does it actually work? I doubt it. The VFS won't allow two different
dentries to refer to the same name. And without that, how would you
have several inodes for a single name?
> > I think what you call namespace invariance is basically true for all
> > existing filesystems. There could be a filesystem which returns
> > different directory contents based on whatever it wants, but it can't
> > return a different "dentry" for the same name.
>
> This is not what I mean. The directory contents itself must be identical
> for every user. And every name must of course correspond with only one
> dentry. That's name-space invariance IMO.
OK.
> > > IMHO The namespace argument against FUSE is weak for multiple
> > > reasons. The only variancy I see is when crossing the mount
> > > point. And that disappears once EACCES is returned when
> > > non-ptraceable processes try to cross it.
> >
> > Yes, but still this is just a difference in permission, and not a
> > difference in namespace.
>
> Exactly. And such a difference in permission already exists for (sane)
> networked file systems such as NFS with "squash_root" in effect on
> the server.
Agreed.
Miklos
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
| |
 |