Re: [RFC/PATCH] revoke/frevoke system calls V2

Ulrich Drepper wrote:

On 7/27/06, H. Peter Anvin <[email protected]> wrote:

No need to add sys_revoke.

Of course not.  I didn't imply that.  sys_revokeat is all that's
needed.  I just provided the other name to make clear they are
equivalent wrt to the file name property.  Not everyone knows the *at
functions.

Right. We shouldn't add ANY more filename system calls at all, though. They can be libc wrappers.

	-hpa
-
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/

---

• References:
  • [RFC/PATCH] revoke/frevoke system calls V2
    • From: Pekka J Enberg <[email protected]>
  • Re: [RFC/PATCH] revoke/frevoke system calls V2
    • From: "Ulrich Drepper" <[email protected]>
  • Re: [RFC/PATCH] revoke/frevoke system calls V2
    • From: Pekka J Enberg <[email protected]>
  • Re: [RFC/PATCH] revoke/frevoke system calls V2
    • From: "Ulrich Drepper" <[email protected]>
  • Re: [RFC/PATCH] revoke/frevoke system calls V2
    • From: "H. Peter Anvin" <[email protected]>
  • Re: [RFC/PATCH] revoke/frevoke system calls V2
    • From: "Ulrich Drepper" <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: Require mmap handler for a.out executables
• Next by Date: Re: O_CAREFUL flag to disable open() side effects
• Previous by thread: Re: [RFC/PATCH] revoke/frevoke system calls V2
• Next by thread: Re: [RFC/PATCH] revoke/frevoke system calls V2
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]