From owner-freebsd-hackers  Sat Jun 24 15:18:50 2000
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mout0.freenet.de (mout0.freenet.de [194.97.50.131])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D4D337B51F
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Sat, 24 Jun 2000 15:18:44 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from ino-waiting@gmx.net)
Received: from [194.97.50.135] (helo=mx2.freenet.de)
	by mout0.freenet.de with esmtp (Exim 3.14 #3)
	id 135yGB-00029w-00
	for freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 00:18:43 +0200
Received: from [213.6.11.52] (helo=spotteswoode.de)
	by mx2.freenet.de with smtp (Exim 3.14 #3)
	id 135yG9-0001A2-00
	for freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 00:18:42 +0200
Received: (qmail 1030 invoked by uid 0); 24 Jun 2000 22:18:40 -0000
From: "clemensF" <ino-waiting@gmx.net>
Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2000 00:18:40 +0200
To: Marius Bendiksen <mbendiks@eunet.no>
Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: sys/ufs/ufs/ufs_quota.c
Message-ID: <20000625001840.A1017@spotteswoode.de>
References: <Pine.BSF.4.05.10006242301540.94193-100000@login-1.eunet.no>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.05.10006242301540.94193-100000@login-1.eunet.no>; from mbendiks@eunet.no on Sat, Jun 24, 2000 at 11:05:02PM +0200
Organization: private
X-PGP-ID: 0xD4685B88-4894C483/DH
X-PGP-FPR: 0FAE 5F53 CEB9 49DE 9300  3035 D468 5B88 4894 C483
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

> Marius Bendiksen:

> the various quota routines, rather than a (struct proc *). As I can see
> >from the code, chkdq(), for example, should rather be using an suser()
> check upon a process structure, than testing cred->cr_uid==0. Are there
> any objections to changing this?

this should be more portable and future-save, right?

clemens


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message