From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Aug 22 15:38:44 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE8AB16A4CE; Sun, 22 Aug 2004 15:38:44 +0000 (GMT) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C56ED43D1F; Sun, 22 Aug 2004 15:38:44 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from csjp@freebsd.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (csjp@localhost [127.0.0.1]) i7MFcipH062631; Sun, 22 Aug 2004 15:38:44 GMT (envelope-from csjp@freebsd.org) Received: (from csjp@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.12.11/8.12.11/Submit) id i7MFcipj062630; Sun, 22 Aug 2004 15:38:44 GMT (envelope-from csjp@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: freefall.freebsd.org: csjp set sender to csjp@freebsd.org using -f Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 15:38:44 +0000 From: "Christian S.J. Peron" To: Pawel Jakub Dawidek Message-ID: <20040822153844.GA34925@freefall.freebsd.org> References: <200408220203.i7M23fb5001923@repoman.freebsd.org> <20040822122156.GK30151@darkness.comp.waw.pl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040822122156.GK30151@darkness.comp.waw.pl> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i cc: cvs-src@freebsd.org cc: src-committers@freebsd.org cc: cvs-all@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/ufs/ufs ufs_vnops.c X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 15:38:45 -0000 On 22 Aug 2004 Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote: > In 5.x we are able to set securelevel per jail, so jail's system > administrator can increase securelevel if he needs this behaviour. > I agree, that we should stay consistent with 4.x, that's why we should > put this under some sysctl with default value, that keeps 4.x > behaviour, but it could be changed if jail's system administrator wants > to take control over system flags. Yes, I think everyone will agree that this is a good idea. -- Christian S.J. Peron csjp@FreeBSD.ORG FreeBSD Committer