From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Oct 9 15:05:02 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02B2916A420; Sun, 9 Oct 2005 15:05:01 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from rodrigc@crodrigues.org) Received: from rwcrmhc12.comcast.net (rwcrmhc12.comcast.net [204.127.198.43]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AAFB43D5A; Sun, 9 Oct 2005 15:05:01 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from rodrigc@crodrigues.org) Received: from c-66-30-112-178.hsd1.ma.comcast.net ([66.30.112.178]) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc12) with ESMTP id <2005100915050001400l51i3e>; Sun, 9 Oct 2005 15:05:00 +0000 Received: from c-66-30-112-178.hsd1.ma.comcast.net (localhost.127.in-addr.arpa [127.0.0.1]) by c-66-30-112-178.hsd1.ma.comcast.net (8.13.4/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j99F4xOM006939; Sun, 9 Oct 2005 11:04:59 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from rodrigc@c-66-30-112-178.hsd1.ma.comcast.net) Received: (from rodrigc@localhost) by c-66-30-112-178.hsd1.ma.comcast.net (8.13.4/8.13.1/Submit) id j99F4xhS006938; Sun, 9 Oct 2005 11:04:59 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from rodrigc) Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2005 11:04:59 -0400 From: Craig Rodrigues To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20051009150459.GA6810@crodrigues.org> References: <20051008024620.GA29824@crodrigues.org> <20051009131253.GB7463@garage.freebsd.pl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20051009131253.GB7463@garage.freebsd.pl> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Cc: pjd@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Teaching mount(8) to use nmount() 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: Sun, 09 Oct 2005 15:05:02 -0000 On Sun, Oct 09, 2005 at 03:12:53PM +0200, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote: > Can't we just check if there is an external binary in _PATH_SYSPATH? > It'll be easier to add new file system then (there will be no need to > change this function). We could do that. I had some thoughts on this: -> In the future, we want to make it difficult for people to add new external mount programs and force them to put the majority of their argument parsing inside the FS, so that it works nicely with nmount() and mount -t. Only in exceptional circumstances should we have an external mount program that works with mount -t....NFS and SMBFS are two special cases I could think of, and in these special cases (and new special cases), we could modify mount(8). -> Could there be security implications of unconditionally checking for a mount_foo binary and invoking it? What if the FS doesn't need an external mount binary and can use nmount()? The security implication isn't too much worse than the existing state of mount(8) today, but I thought I would throw it out there to think about. In this model, people could still write their own external mount programs....they would just be forced to make sure that for every option (-C, -q, -r), there is a corresponding (-o filesystemoption=foo1) option, so that it works with mount -t, because mount isn't going automatically fork() the new external mount program. Also, this would make certain these options would be settable from /etc/fstab. -- Craig Rodrigues rodrigc@crodrigues.org