From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Nov 7 11:10:25 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F0541065677; Fri, 7 Nov 2008 11:10:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ceri@submonkey.net) Received: from scuttle.submonkey.net (scuttle.submonkey.net [208.111.43.184]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33F9E8FC1D; Fri, 7 Nov 2008 11:10:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ceri@submonkey.net) Received: from cpc1-cdif1-0-0-cust63.cdif.cable.ntl.com ([81.104.164.64] helo=shrike.submonkey.net) by scuttle.submonkey.net with esmtpsa (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1KyPEO-0004Mi-PQ; Fri, 07 Nov 2008 11:10:24 +0000 Received: from ceri by shrike.submonkey.net with local (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1KyPEM-000Flg-OR; Fri, 07 Nov 2008 11:10:22 +0000 Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 11:10:22 +0000 From: Ceri Davies To: Edward Tomasz Napierala Message-ID: <20081107111022.GB34757@submonkey.net> References: <20081027193545.GA95872@pin.if.uz.zgora.pl> <20081028161855.GA45129@zim.MIT.EDU> <20081106192829.GA98742@pin.if.uz.zgora.pl> <20081106195558.GG2281@submonkey.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="neYutvxvOLaeuPCA" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20081106195558.GG2281@submonkey.net> X-PGP: finger ceri@FreeBSD.org User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: Ceri Davies Cc: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Directory rename semantics. X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2008 11:10:25 -0000 --neYutvxvOLaeuPCA Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Nov 06, 2008 at 07:55:58PM +0000, Ceri Davies wrote: > On Thu, Nov 06, 2008 at 08:28:29PM +0100, Edward Tomasz Napierala wrote: > > After discussion about this with rwatson and pjd, I decided to do > > the opposite: change ZFS behaviour to match UFS. Reason is simple: > > this is security, and we want to be conservative here. It's impossible > > to make sure this change wouldn't cause security problems. >=20 > Perhaps it would have been better to either do nothing or create a zfs > property that toggled this behaviour so that people who expect ZFS to > behave a certain way get it. I'm not sure why we would want all > filesystems to behave the same way, to be honest. I'm essentially unhappy here that a change to UFS which is local to us was considered important enough to ask -arch about, while ZFS which exists on at least two other operating systems was deemed fine to go ahead and change without review. Ceri --=20 That must be wonderful! I don't understand it at all. -- Moliere --neYutvxvOLaeuPCA Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (FreeBSD) iD4DBQFJFCIeocfcwTS3JF8RAgHLAJwKIP7ffaEwuCquU8w9vaA5erbRNQCY6dio Kcmqqxq5bEzjvbldwjx2LA== =ZwCD -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --neYutvxvOLaeuPCA--