Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 15:15:50 -0800 (PST) From: Julian Elischer <julian@whistle.com> To: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> Cc: Mark Hannon <mark.hannon@stockholm.mail.telia.com>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Change to inherit nodump flag? Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.95.990209151210.5802O-100000@current1.whistle.com> In-Reply-To: <199902092241.OAA61365@apollo.backplane.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I don't think this is a good idea a better idea is to make th eapplication not descend into trees that have the nodump bit set on the directory. you can't "inherrit" all the way up a directory tree when it's moved into a directory with the nodump flag set. (I have the same problem with the SUIDDIR option in around the same piece of code..) julian > Yes, somewhere around line 2091 of ufs_vnops.c ( ufs_create() ). > Also around line 1296 of ufs_vnops.c ( ufs_mkdir() ). Just after > the gid inheritance. > > ... > ip = VTOI(tvp); > ip->i_gid = pdir->i_gid; > <-------------------- here > ... > > The 'i_flags' field ( not to be confused with 'i_flag' ) would have > to inherit the directory's nodump flag. > > Personally, I think this is the correct way of doing it - nodump > would be inherited just as directory gid is inherited. > > Another solution would be to hack the 'dump' program to be able to > remember 'nodump' recursively. I don't think that is as good a > solution as adjusting i_flags on create. > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.95.990209151210.5802O-100000>