From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Nov 6 21:20:44 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 76B801065678 for ; Thu, 6 Nov 2008 21:20:44 +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 5C0128FC31 for ; Thu, 6 Nov 2008 21:20:44 +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 1KyAxU-0000TK-UL; Thu, 06 Nov 2008 19:56:01 +0000 Received: from ceri by shrike.submonkey.net with local (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1KyAxS-0008Qv-I6; Thu, 06 Nov 2008 19:55:58 +0000 Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2008 19:55:58 +0000 From: Ceri Davies To: Edward Tomasz Napierala Message-ID: <20081106195558.GG2281@submonkey.net> References: <20081027193545.GA95872@pin.if.uz.zgora.pl> <20081028161855.GA45129@zim.MIT.EDU> <20081106192829.GA98742@pin.if.uz.zgora.pl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="KFztAG8eRSV9hGtP" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20081106192829.GA98742@pin.if.uz.zgora.pl> 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: Thu, 06 Nov 2008 21:20:44 -0000 --KFztAG8eRSV9hGtP Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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. 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. Ceri --=20 That must be wonderful! I don't understand it at all. -- Moliere --KFztAG8eRSV9hGtP Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFJE0vOocfcwTS3JF8RAujaAJ9lAZEeWe2enMySc2P+BhubPmhhkQCguysj wXnwtJ4+QPUFMSQf+yxRcEE= =leXE -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --KFztAG8eRSV9hGtP--