From owner-freebsd-hackers  Fri Nov 14 01:33:04 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id BAA15654
          for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 14 Nov 1997 01:33:04 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers)
Received: from thorin.hway.ru (root@thorin.hway.ru [194.87.58.130])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA15642
          for <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Fri, 14 Nov 1997 01:32:58 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from tischenko@intech.hway.ru)
Received: from flash.intech.hway.ru (flash.intech.hway.ru [192.168.1.16])
	by thorin.hway.ru (8.8.6/8.8.6) with ESMTP id MAA00188;
	Fri, 14 Nov 1997 12:24:07 +0300 (MSK)
Message-Id: <199711140924.MAA00188@thorin.hway.ru>
From: "Alexander V. Tischenko" <tischenko@intech.hway.ru>
To: "Nate Williams" <nate@mt.sri.com>, "Terry Lambert" <tlambert@primenet.com>
Cc: <sos@freebsd.dk>, <julian@whistle.com>, <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Subject: Re: SUID-Directories patch
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 12:25:57 +0300
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1161
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> From: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com>
> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>
> Cc: sos@freebsd.dk; julian@whistle.com; hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
> Subject: Re: SUID-Directories patch
> 
> > One of the main incentives for commercial entities to give code
> > back is offloading of maintenance.  You can of course pick and
> > choose what you want to take, but the fix seems generically
> > useful
> 
> And is in 3.0-current, but doesn't belong in 2.2.  On the flip side,
> just because a commercial entity donates code doesn't mean we should
> take it into the source tree lock/stock/and barrel.
> 
> 
> 
> Nate

I am not shure people running network file servers will be eager to upgrade
to _ANY_ new version unless expressely needed (i will not for shure!), so
to have an incorporated patch for 2.2 that will solve administrative
problems
IS a good thing and also a must. And as for 3.0 - it is very unstable yet
and shurely can't be used for building corporate heavy load servers.

IMHO, the patch MUST be incorporated.

Alexander V. Tischenko.