Matthieu Moy wrote: > I didn't find a satisfying solution to this problem, but at least in > my precise case, automatically removing the revlib entries for which > inode signature fails would have been a solution (a better solution > for this would have been a second signature, based on a hash, that > would survive backup/restore and rebuild the inode signature on > demand). > In my case, the corporate box I am using has a cron job pruning old files in /tmp, where I have to use for my revlib. I really don't think "intrusion detection" or "forensic clue" should be the concern here. inode signatures are very weak in term of security measures; if people can mess with your revlib you are doomed anyway. Printing a warning message is reasonable though. Regarding the atomic operation concerns, are you sure tla currently support concurrent access to the revlib? > Matthieu Derek
_______________________________________________ Gnu-arch-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users GNU arch home page: http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/
