Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 9 Oct 1999 12:48:22 -0400 (EDT)
From:      Matt Behrens <matt@zigg.com>
To:        Jacques Vidrine <n@nectar.com>
Cc:        freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: merging current's jail functionality to stable 
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.4.10.9910091247260.25227-100000@megaweapon.zigg.com>
In-Reply-To: <19991009160651.314441D87@bone.nectar.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 9 Oct 1999, Jacques Vidrine wrote:

: I forgot one more, which is probably the most desirable if there
: are a significant number of 3rd-party binaries to support:
:     = Don't change suser, but bring in the rest of the changes needed
:       for jail (add suser_xxx and update the 16 or so files that need
:       the new semantics).  This means that suser in -STABLE and -CURRENT 
:       are still different (as it is today), but it puts of breaking
:       binary compatibility until 4.0-RELEASE. 

Is suser needed to properly support jail?  Without suser being
updated, will we have a hole in the implementation?

Matt Behrens <matt@zigg.com>
Owner/Administrator, zigg.com
Chief Engineer, Nameless IRC Network



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" 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.4.10.9910091247260.25227-100000>