From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+willy=40w.ods.org-S265847AbUGDXam@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S265847AbUGDXam (ORCPT <rfc822;willy@w.ods.org>);
	Sun, 4 Jul 2004 19:30:42 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S265863AbUGDXal
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Sun, 4 Jul 2004 19:30:41 -0400
Received: from mtvcafw.sgi.com ([192.48.171.6]:11039 "EHLO omx2.sgi.com")
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S265847AbUGDX3p (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sun, 4 Jul 2004 19:29:45 -0400
Date: Sun, 4 Jul 2004 16:30:12 -0700
From: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com>
To: FabF <fabian.frederick@skynet.be>
Cc: ak@muc.de, viro@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: procfs permissions on 2.6.x
Message-Id: <20040704163012.5dd9b971.pj@sgi.com>
In-Reply-To: <1088980642.2429.4.camel@localhost.localdomain>
References: <2dZjc-7BP-15@gated-at.bofh.it>
	<2dZjf-7BP-27@gated-at.bofh.it>
	<2dZsQ-7GF-23@gated-at.bofh.it>
	<2dZVV-867-33@gated-at.bofh.it>
	<2e0oZ-8lm-35@gated-at.bofh.it>
	<2emSs-6R8-17@gated-at.bofh.it>
	<2enbS-72q-19@gated-at.bofh.it>
	<2env9-7li-9@gated-at.bofh.it>
	<m34qone7f6.fsf@averell.firstfloor.org>
	<1088980642.2429.4.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Organization: SGI
X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.10claws (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

> if mods are accurately defined from the beginning

Is there a single "accurate" definition (of /proc file permissions)
on which we agree?  I suspect not.

-- 
                          I won't rest till it's the best ...
                          Programmer, Linux Scalability
                          Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> 1.650.933.1373