From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Apr 16 13:28:53 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from kalypso.cybercom.net (kalypso.cybercom.net [209.21.136.5]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E87A414CCE for ; Fri, 16 Apr 1999 13:28:44 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ksmm@threespace.com) Received: from localhost (ksmm@localhost) by kalypso.cybercom.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with SMTP id QAA12899 for ; Fri, 16 Apr 1999 16:26:21 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 16:26:18 -0400 (EDT) From: The Classiest Man Alive X-Sender: ksmm@kalypso.cybercom.net To: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Entombing for FreeBSD In-Reply-To: <199904161955.MAA59781@apollo.backplane.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG For that matter, does it offer anything that a set of intelligent scripts/wrappers for common destructive commands wouldn't give you? --K.S. On Fri, 16 Apr 1999, Matthew Dillon wrote: : I've been thinking about this enombing thing... well, I hate to say it, : but crowbaring into libc is *not* the right way to do it. It's : just too intrusive. The right way to do it would be to write a device : driver similar to NULLFS which handles backing up the files, thus giving : the sysad the option to use such a device to mount-through those partitions : that the sysad wants to keep checkpointed. Also, putting such intrusive : code into libc would be fairly dangreous from a security point of view : even if it is turned off. : : -Matt : Matthew Dillon : To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message