Re: More modutils: It's probably worse.

["H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>]

Followup to:  <20001114152430.C2645@alcove.wittsend.com>
By author:    "Michael H. Warfield" <mhw@wittsend.com>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> 	Oh, I hate to add to a remark like that (OK, I lied, I love
> trollbait...)
> 
> On Tue, Nov 14, 2000 at 11:20:35AM -0800, Ben Ford wrote:
> > Olaf Kirch wrote:
> 
> > > sure request_module _does_not_ accept funky module names. Why allow
> > > people to shoot themselves (and, by extension, all other Linux users
> > > out there) in the foot?
> 
> > I thought that was the whole purpose of Unix/Linux?
> 
> 	True!  Very true!  Unix/Linux requires that the user shoot
> themselves in the foot.  Windows automates that process and does it
> for the user, thus making foot shooting user friendly.  :-)
> 

Seriously, though, I don't see any reason modprobe shouldn't accept
funky filenames.  There is a standard way to do that, which is to have
an argument consisting of the string "--"; this indicates that any
further arguments should be considered filenames and not options.

For example:

rm -- -foo		# Delete a file named "-foo"

	-hpa

-- 
<hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/