From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S267737AbUHWVw1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Aug 2004 17:52:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S268146AbUHWVjg (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Aug 2004 17:39:36 -0400 Received: from ctb-mesg2.saix.net ([196.25.240.74]:58305 "EHLO ctb-mesg2.saix.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S267891AbUHWVYV (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Aug 2004 17:24:21 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH][7/7] add xattr support to ramfs [u] From: "Martin Schlemmer [c]" Reply-To: Martin Schlemmer To: Greg KH Cc: Stephen Smalley , Christoph Hellwig , James Morris , Andrew Morton , Alexander Viro , lkml In-Reply-To: <20040823205942.GA3370@kroah.com> References: <20040823212623.A20995@infradead.org> <1093292789.27211.279.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil> <20040823205942.GA3370@kroah.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-G7f2nFOglPHToUCijAgB" Message-Id: <1093296463.7561.0.camel@nosferatu.lan> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6 Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 23:27:44 +0200 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --=-G7f2nFOglPHToUCijAgB Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, 2004-08-23 at 22:59, Greg KH wrote: > On Mon, Aug 23, 2004 at 04:26:29PM -0400, Stephen Smalley wrote: > > On Mon, 2004-08-23 at 16:26, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > On Mon, Aug 23, 2004 at 02:22:20PM -0400, James Morris wrote: > > > > This patch adds xattr support to tmpfs, and a security xattr handle= r. > > > > Original patch from: Chris PeBenito > > >=20 > > > What's the point on doing this for ramfs? And if you really want thi= s > > > the implementation could be shared with tmpfs easily and put into xat= tr.c > >=20 > > For udev. >=20 > What's wrong with using a tmpfs for udev in such situations that xattrs > are needed? udev does not require ramfs at all. In fact, why not just > use a ext2 or ext3 partition for /dev instead today, if you really need > it? >=20 Root-less boxes comes to mind ... Wont comment on if tmpfs/ramfs should be used though - that you guys can sort out =3D) Thanks, --=20 Martin Schlemmer --=-G7f2nFOglPHToUCijAgB Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBBKmFPqburzKaJYLYRAtDkAJ9coqAXyzQVQMc5DoqLM5oAHlYQ7QCfasMC vLeV9BhJ/AFrqj2KYqcQqaI= =BGw5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-G7f2nFOglPHToUCijAgB--