From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Nov 7 12:33:03 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 1169D1065689 for ; Fri, 7 Nov 2008 12:33:03 +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 E9E1A8FC19 for ; Fri, 7 Nov 2008 12:33:02 +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 1KyQWM-0005nV-4T; Fri, 07 Nov 2008 12:33:02 +0000 Received: from ceri by shrike.submonkey.net with local (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1KyQWK-000EPo-1H; Fri, 07 Nov 2008 12:33:00 +0000 Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 12:32:59 +0000 From: Ceri Davies To: Ivan Voras Message-ID: <20081107123259.GC34757@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="/e2eDi0V/xtL+Mc8" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: 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 12:33:03 -0000 --/e2eDi0V/xtL+Mc8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Nov 07, 2008 at 11:44:27AM +0100, Ivan Voras wrote: > 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. >=20 > That would be desirable if we want file system semantics to be a > property of the OS instead of individual file systems. (Though I don't > know if there's ever been a conscious decision about this particular > goal). If so, a knob that toggles between the behaviours should toggle > it for all file systems. Having them behave differently can create > problems in migration to and from ZFS. That's essentially what has just happened, but without the knob. I'm not really sure whether you agree with the change that was made or not. Ceri --=20 That must be wonderful! I don't understand it at all. -- Moliere --/e2eDi0V/xtL+Mc8 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFJFDV7ocfcwTS3JF8RArXoAKCw0tLcK3j0CpT8KS2+aSN7wWi/pQCgv1Ki QcW9OUkLnAN8XyY6i2vy26A= =AmiG -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --/e2eDi0V/xtL+Mc8--