perfect MAX_ORDER?
hi, the default MAX_ORDER is 10. as i don't know anything about page usage, i did some tests to see how it affects performance (with the infamous kernel compile time). here it is (all +6m): 1st test2nd testmean 2 40.153 3 38.543 4 38.065 38.615 38.350 5 36.778 38.696 37.737 6 37.902 37.800 37.851 7 36.990 36.650 36.820 8 37.157 36.379 36.768 9 37.215 10 37.951 11 36.889 12 36.773 13 36.765 14 36.533 15 37.683 so i conclude that the test is inconclusive. only the first three (MAX_ORDER == [234]) have noticeable difference, but those must be affected by the shrinked dentry & page cache hash table size, right? the machine has 128mb ram, so the maximum MAX_ORDER that really works is 14 (largest chunk 32mb). if i use MAX_ORDER = 6 i save one page. so what should i use? 6, 14, or the default (10)? would somebody care how the chunks used? imel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[PATCH] Single user linux
hi, a friend of my asked me on how to make linux easier to use for personal/casual win user. i found out that one of the big problem with linux and most other operating system is the multi-user thing. i think, no personal computer user should know about what's an operating system idea of a user. they just want to use the computer, that's it. by a personal computer i mean home pc, notebook, tablet, pda, and communicator. only one user will use those devices, or maybe his/her friend/family. do you think that user want to know about user account? from that, i also found out that it is very awkward to type username and password every time i use my computer. so here's a patch. i also have removed the user_struct from my kernel, but i don't think you'd like #ifdef's. may be it'll be good for midori too. imel --- sched.h Mon Apr 2 18:57:06 2001 +++ sched.h~Tue Apr 24 17:32:33 2001 @@ -655,6 +655,12 @@ unsigned long, const char *, void *); extern void free_irq(unsigned int, void *); +#ifdef CONFIG_NOUSER +#define capable(x) 1 +#define suser()1 +#define fsuser() 1 +#else + /* * This has now become a routine instead of a macro, it sets a flag if * it returns true (to do BSD-style accounting where the process is flagged @@ -706,6 +712,8 @@ } return 0; } + +#endif /* CONFIG_NOUSER */ /* * Routines for handling mm_structs diff -ur linux/Documentation/Configure.help nouser/Documentation/Configure.help --- linux/Documentation/Configure.help Mon Apr 2 18:53:29 2001 +++ nouser/Documentation/Configure.help Tue Apr 24 18:08:49 2001 @@ -13626,6 +13626,14 @@ a work-around for a number of buggy BIOSes. Switch this option on if your computer crashes instead of powering off properly. +Disable Multi-user (DANGEROUS) +CONFIG_NOUSER + Disable kernel multi-user support. Normally, we treat each user + differently, depending on his/her permissions. If you _really_ + think that you're not going to use your computer in a hostile + environment and would like to cut a few bytes, say Y. + Most people should say N. + Watchdog Timer Support CONFIG_WATCHDOG If you say Y here (and to one of the following options) and create a diff -ur linux/arch/i386/config.in nouser/arch/i386/config.in --- linux/arch/i386/config.in Mon Feb 5 18:50:27 2001 +++ nouser/arch/i386/config.in Tue Apr 24 17:53:42 2001 @@ -244,6 +244,8 @@ bool 'Use real mode APM BIOS call to power off' CONFIG_APM_REAL_MODE_POWER_OFF fi +bool 'Disable Multi-user (DANGEROUS)' CONFIG_NOUSER + endmenu source drivers/mtd/Config.in - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] Single user linux
On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Alexander Viro wrote: > What, makes it hard to write viruses for it? Awww, poor skr1pt k1dd13z... > > > And would that "use" by any chance include access to network? > > > So let him log in as root, do everything as root and be cracked > like a bloody moron he is. Next? > come on, it's hard for me as it's hard for you. not everybody expect a computer to be like people here thinks how a computer should be. think about personal devices. something like the nokia communicator. a system security passwd is acceptable, but that's it. no those- device-user would like to know about user account, file ownership, etc. they just want to use it. that also explain why win95 user doesn't want to use NT. not because they can't afford it (belive me, here NT costs only us$2), but additional headache isn't acceptable. with multi-user concept, conceptually there should be an administrator to create account, grant permission, etc. no my sister doesn't want that. i bet there are billions of people not willing to learn how to use a computer, they just want to use it. and yes, mobile devices access network. > What for? If they want root - give them root and be done with that. > No need to change the kernel. > > You know, if you really do not understand the implications of > running everything with permissions equivalent to root - get > the hell out of any UNIX-related programming until you learn. > > If you want CP/M or MacOS - you know where to find them. so what the hell is transmeta doing with mobile linux (midori). is it going to teach multi-user thing to tablet owners? surely mortals expect midori to behave like their pc. lets say on redhat, they have to login as root to access their files, they don't even know what a root is! lets break unix mind for a while, and give everyone a chance to use linux. imel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] Single user linux
On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Daniel Stone wrote: > Hence, Microsoft Windows. It might not be stable, it might not be fast, it > might not do RAID, packet-filtering and SQL, but it does a job. A simple > job. To give Mum & Dad(tm) (with apologies to maddog) a chance to use a > computer. > > > Since when, did mobile phones == computers? read the news! i'm programming nokia 9210 with c++, is that computer enough? i bet if you programmed one, you'd wish you have posix interface. > > > that also explain why win95 user doesn't want to use NT. not > > because they can't afford it (belive me, here NT costs only > > us$2), but additional headache isn't acceptable. > > So, let them stay in Win95. They don't *need* NT. and how's stability, speed, etc. they read. is there a linux advocate around here? > If your sister doesn't want that, give your sister a copy of Win95. If she > doesn't want that, she obviously wouldn't get any advantage out of Linux, as > opposed to Win95, whatsoever. Would she get a kick out of having to learn an > entirely new environment? Granted, I'm far more productive in GNOME, > Sawfish, emacs and mutt than Win95, Word and Outlook, but it takes people > time to get used to, and you'll have trouble dragging them out of > point-n-click. okay, it wouldn't cost me. but it surely easier if everybody used linux, so i could put my ext2 disk everywhere i want. hey, it's obvious that it's not for a server! i try to point out a problem for people not on this list, don't work around that problem. imel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] Single user linux
On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Richard B. Johnson wrote: > You are on the wrong list. You don't modify the kernel to make > a "single-user" machine. You modify the password file in /etc/passwd. > Until you know, and completely understand this, you will be laughed at. > > When an interactive process is started, /bin/login gets the new > process information from the /etc/passwd file just before it gets > overwritten (exec) by the shell shown in that same password file. > > If you want your accounts to have root privs, you set the UID and > GID fields in the password file to 0 and 0 respectively. I would > not suggest that you connect your computer to a network if you > do this. thank you very much fyi. if just you tried to understand it a little further: i didn't change all uid/gid to 0! why? so with that radical patch, users will still have uid/gid so programs know the user's profile. if everyone had 0/0 uid/gid, pine will open /var/spool/mail/root, etc. imel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
problem found (was Re: [PATCH] Single user linux)
On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Daniel Stone wrote: > Aah. I see. Where was this? I never saw it. psst, it's a proto. > That may be so, so hack up your own OS. It's a MOBILE PHONE, it needs to be > absolutely *rock solid*. Look at the 5110, that's just about perfect. The > 7110, on the other hand ... mobile phone to you! already, people has put linux on pdas. > There are Linux advocates, but I'd say most of us are sane enough to use the > right-tool-for-the-job approach. And UNIX on a phone is pure overkill. problem is you guys are to unix-centric, try to be user-centric a little. it's not like it ruins everything. that patch basically do something like allowing access to port <1024 to everybody, someone just need to bring a notebook to get passwd from nis. multi-user security is useless at home as physical access is there. imel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] Single user linux
On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Alan Cox wrote: > > so what the hell is transmeta doing with mobile linux (midori). > > is it going to teach multi-user thing to tablet owners? > > Thats you problem. Distinguish the OS from the user interface. sigh. is that mean the little thing had to do capable() check each time it access something? > Even my digital tv box has multiple users. The fact you cannot figure out how > to make your UI present that to the end user in a suitable manner is not > the kernels problem. Get a real UI designer if it's useful, it's okay. if not, what is it doing there? imel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[RFC] linux class diagrams
hi, i put some gifs describing linux. they're in uml. linux doesn't have class, so i tried to capture every struct (struct is kinda class in c++) related to task_struct. why? it's a school project. but it turned out to be a help to understand the kernel. maybe the kernel could use more object oriented design, like the inode? anyway, i need some pointers and comments. imel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [RFC] linux class diagrams
hah, i forgot the url. it's at http://www.trustix.co.id/~imel96/linux/ #kernelnewbies have not much help, or they all live in different time zone. i just wanna know how people look at the kernel at design level. is it describeable in uml, etc. imel On Tue, 27 Feb 2001, Erik Mouw wrote: > On Tue, Feb 27, 2001 at 09:54:54PM +0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > i put some gifs describing linux. they're in uml. > > linux doesn't have class, so i tried to capture every > > struct (struct is kinda class in c++) related to task_struct. > > > > why? it's a school project. but it turned out to be a help to > > understand the kernel. maybe the kernel could use more object > > oriented design, like the inode? > > > > anyway, i need some pointers and comments. > > Well, http://www.kernelnewbies.org/ is a good starting point for > information, but we are always open for better/more information. Just > drop by on the #kernelnewbies IRC channel. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[PATCH] plan9 partition support
hi all,
this one patch i believe is harmless as it only
reads partition table, but who knows. the diff
is against 2.4.0.
the patch locates partitions inside the plan9
partition table.
as you may know, a plan9 partition table has three
type of partitions inside (9fat, fs, and swap).
9fat is fat16.
plan9 puts its boot loader in the 9fat partition.
with this patch i can locate the 9fat partition so
lilo could boot plan9.
with msdos file system, linux will mount 9fat partition,
so you could use the 9fat partition from linux and plan9.
i can't find anyone with plan9 to test, but it works for
me, so... i'm not on the list anymore, so please cc.
imel
diff -ur linux~/Documentation/Configure.help linux/Documentation/Configure.help
--- linux~/Documentation/Configure.help Fri Jan 5 16:27:43 2001
+++ linux/Documentation/Configure.help Sun Jan 7 18:22:25 2001
@@ -11470,6 +11470,17 @@
Say Y here if you would like to use hard disks under Linux which
were partitioned on an x86 PC (not necessarily by DOS).
+Plan9 partition table support (EXPERIMENTAL)
+CONFIG_PLAN9_PARTITION
+ Plan9 uses its own hard disk partition scheme on your PC. It
+ requires only one entry in the primary partition table of your disk
+ and manages it similarly to DOS extended partitions. Plan9 has FAT16
+ filesystem as the first partition to put its boot loader. Saying Y
+ here allows you to read the existing partition, and mount the FAT
+ partition from within Linux (if you have also said Y to "MSDOS file
+ system support"), which gives you the ability to make LILO work with
+ Plan9. If you don't know what all this is about, say N.
+
BSD disklabel (FreeBSD partition tables) support
CONFIG_BSD_DISKLABEL
FreeBSD uses its own hard disk partition scheme on your PC. It
diff -ur linux~/fs/partitions/Config.in linux/fs/partitions/Config.in
--- linux~/fs/partitions/Config.in Mon Jul 10 12:21:41 2000
+++ linux/fs/partitions/Config.in Sun Jan 7 18:37:27 2001
@@ -23,6 +23,7 @@
bool 'BSD disklabel (FreeBSD partition tables) support'
CONFIG_BSD_DISKLABEL
bool 'Solaris (x86) partition table support' CONFIG_SOLARIS_X86_PARTITION
bool 'Unixware slices support' CONFIG_UNIXWARE_DISKLABEL
+ dep_bool 'Plan9 partition support (EXPERIMENTAL)' CONFIG_PLAN9_PARTITION
+$CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL
fi
bool ' SGI partition support' CONFIG_SGI_PARTITION
bool ' Ultrix partition table support' CONFIG_ULTRIX_PARTITION
diff -ur linux~/fs/partitions/msdos.c linux/fs/partitions/msdos.c
--- linux~/fs/partitions/msdos.cFri Nov 17 17:18:46 2000
+++ linux/fs/partitions/msdos.c Sun Jan 7 18:46:34 2001
@@ -17,6 +17,8 @@
* Check partition table on IDE disks for common CHS translations
*
* Re-organised Feb 1998 Russell King
+ *
+ * plan9 partition hack 2001 Jan, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*/
#include
@@ -228,6 +230,55 @@
}
#endif
+#ifdef CONFIG_PLAN9_PARTITION
+
+static void add_plan9_partition(struct gendisk *hd, struct plan9_partition
+ *plan9_p, int minor)
+{
+ add_gd_partition(hd, current_minor, plan9_p->p_offset, plan9_p->p_size);
+ current_minor++;
+}
+
+/*
+ * Create devices for plan9 partitions listed in a disklabel, under a
+ * dos-like partition. See bsd code for more information.
+ */
+static void plan9_disklabel_partition(struct gendisk *hd, int minor, int st_sec)
+{
+ struct buffer_head *bh;
+ struct plan9_partition p;
+ char * ptr;
+ char buf[40];
+
+ if (!(bh = get_partition_table_block(hd, minor, 0)))
+ return;
+
+ printk(" %s: b_data + 0x200;
+
+ while (!strncmp(ptr, "part", 4)) {
+
+ /* locate offset number (which is two spaces away) */
+ while (*ptr++ != ' ');
+ while (*ptr++ != ' ');
+ p.p_offset = simple_strtoul(ptr, NULL, 10);
+
+ /* find end sector number (next number) */
+ while (*ptr++ != ' ');
+ p.p_size = simple_strtoul(ptr, NULL, 10) - p.p_offset;
+ p.p_offset += st_sec;
+
+ add_plan9_partition(hd, &p, minor);
+
+ /* go on to next partition */
+ while (*ptr++ != '\n');
+ }
+ bforget(bh);
+ printk(" >\n");
+}
+
+#endif
+
#ifdef CONFIG_BSD_DISKLABEL
static void
check_and_add_bsd_partition(struct gendisk *hd,
@@ -499,6 +550,10 @@
SYS_IND(p) == NETBSD_PARTITION ||
SYS_IND(p) == OPENBSD_PARTITION)
bsd_disklabel_partition(hd, minor, SYS_IND(p));
+#endif
+#ifdef CONFIG_PLAN9_PARTITION
+ if (SYS_IND(p) == PLAN9_PARTITION)
+ plan9_disklabel_partition(hd, minor, START_
[PATCH] plan9 partition support
hi all,
this one patch i believe is harmless as it only
reads partition table, but who knows. the diff
is against 2.4.0.
the patch locates partitions inside the plan9
partition table.
as you may know, a plan9 partition table has three
type of partitions inside (9fat, fs, and swap).
9fat is fat16.
with msdos file system, linux will mount 9fat partition,
so you could use the 9fat and other fat16 partition inside
plan9 from linux and plan9.
i can't find anyone with plan9 to test, but it works for
me, so...
imel
diff -ur linux~/Documentation/Configure.help linux/Documentation/Configure.help
--- linux~/Documentation/Configure.help Fri Jan 5 16:27:43 2001
+++ linux/Documentation/Configure.help Sat Jan 13 14:46:10 2001
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
# Maintained by Axel Boldt ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
#
# This version of the Linux kernel configuration help texts
-# corresponds to the kernel versions 2.3.x.
+# corresponds to the kernel versions 2.4.x.
#
# Translations of this file available on the WWW:
#
@@ -11469,6 +11469,17 @@
CONFIG_MSDOS_PARTITION
Say Y here if you would like to use hard disks under Linux which
were partitioned on an x86 PC (not necessarily by DOS).
+
+Plan9 partition table support (EXPERIMENTAL)
+CONFIG_PLAN9_PARTITION
+ Plan9 uses its own hard disk partition scheme on your PC. It
+ requires only one entry in the primary partition table of your disk
+ and manages it similarly to DOS extended partitions. Saying Y
+ here allows you to read the existing partitions, and mount FAT16
+ partitions from within Linux, if you have also said Y to "MSDOS fs
+ support" or "VFAT (Windows-95) fs support". You can mount the first
+ FAT16 partition (9fat) directly without this. If you don't know what
+ all this is about, say N.
BSD disklabel (FreeBSD partition tables) support
CONFIG_BSD_DISKLABEL
diff -ur linux~/fs/partitions/Config.in linux/fs/partitions/Config.in
--- linux~/fs/partitions/Config.in Mon Jul 10 12:21:41 2000
+++ linux/fs/partitions/Config.in Sun Jan 7 18:37:27 2001
@@ -23,6 +23,7 @@
bool 'BSD disklabel (FreeBSD partition tables) support'
CONFIG_BSD_DISKLABEL
bool 'Solaris (x86) partition table support' CONFIG_SOLARIS_X86_PARTITION
bool 'Unixware slices support' CONFIG_UNIXWARE_DISKLABEL
+ dep_bool 'Plan9 partition support (EXPERIMENTAL)' CONFIG_PLAN9_PARTITION
+$CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL
fi
bool ' SGI partition support' CONFIG_SGI_PARTITION
bool ' Ultrix partition table support' CONFIG_ULTRIX_PARTITION
diff -ur linux~/fs/partitions/msdos.c linux/fs/partitions/msdos.c
--- linux~/fs/partitions/msdos.cFri Nov 17 17:18:46 2000
+++ linux/fs/partitions/msdos.c Sun Jan 7 18:46:34 2001
@@ -17,6 +17,8 @@
* Check partition table on IDE disks for common CHS translations
*
* Re-organised Feb 1998 Russell King
+ *
+ * plan9 partition hack 2001 Jan, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*/
#include
@@ -228,6 +230,55 @@
}
#endif
+#ifdef CONFIG_PLAN9_PARTITION
+
+static void add_plan9_partition(struct gendisk *hd, struct plan9_partition
+ *plan9_p, int minor)
+{
+ add_gd_partition(hd, current_minor, plan9_p->p_offset, plan9_p->p_size);
+ current_minor++;
+}
+
+/*
+ * Create devices for plan9 partitions listed in a disklabel, under a
+ * dos-like partition. See bsd code for more information.
+ */
+static void plan9_disklabel_partition(struct gendisk *hd, int minor, int st_sec)
+{
+ struct buffer_head *bh;
+ struct plan9_partition p;
+ char * ptr;
+ char buf[40];
+
+ if (!(bh = get_partition_table_block(hd, minor, 0)))
+ return;
+
+ printk(" %s: b_data + 0x200;
+
+ while (!strncmp(ptr, "part", 4)) {
+
+ /* locate offset number (which is two spaces away) */
+ while (*ptr++ != ' ');
+ while (*ptr++ != ' ');
+ p.p_offset = simple_strtoul(ptr, NULL, 10);
+
+ /* find end sector number (next number) */
+ while (*ptr++ != ' ');
+ p.p_size = simple_strtoul(ptr, NULL, 10) - p.p_offset;
+ p.p_offset += st_sec;
+
+ add_plan9_partition(hd, &p, minor);
+
+ /* go on to next partition */
+ while (*ptr++ != '\n');
+ }
+ bforget(bh);
+ printk(" >\n");
+}
+
+#endif
+
#ifdef CONFIG_BSD_DISKLABEL
static void
check_and_add_bsd_partition(struct gendisk *hd,
@@ -499,6 +550,10 @@
SYS_IND(p) == NETBSD_PARTITION ||
SYS_IND(p) == OPENBSD_PARTITION)
bsd_disklabel_partition(hd, minor, SYS_IND(p));
+#endif
+#ifdef CONFIG_PLAN9_PARTITION
+ if (SYS_IND(p) == PLAN9_PARTITION)
+
Re: [PATCH] plan9 partition support
hi, i read the man page more carefully, it says that the partition table is really just a textual partition table. the __u32 came from bsd partition table code i copied. i also fixed the doc. the 9fat always has the same starting sector number with the plan9 partition table, only plan9 put its information in the 2nd sector. On Sun, 14 Jan 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I'll have a look. > A week ago you sent almost the same patch. > Was there a reason to change __u32 into unsigned long? imel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[2.4.0-test10] zImage, pcmcia, and ufs(44bsd)
hi all, just a few reports: 1. zImage in test10 somehow isn't working properly. i have a zImage sized a bit more than 500kb on my harddrive which hangs at the loading process (the one showing dots). i write the image to a floppy, and it boots just fine. if i recompiled my kernel so the zImage size is around 490kb, the image gets loaded just fine. 2. pcmcia is still missing from the test* series. it still only cardbus and no pcmcia. i still have to edit autoconf.h myself which is working just fine for me. 3. i use ufs to mount my freebsd4 partition, following the instruction (including read-write support). i can read the partition, but i can't write. mount(8) shows that the partition is mounted rw. i also get: UFS-fs error (device 03:05): ufs_add_entry: internal error fragoff xxx just drop me a line if you want me to test bugfix. imel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [2.4.0-test10] zImage, pcmcia, and ufs(44bsd)
> imel96 wrote: > > > > hi all, > > > > just a few reports: > > > > 1. zImage in test10 somehow isn't working properly. i have a > > zImage sized a bit more than 500kb on my harddrive which hangs at > > the loading process (the one showing dots). > > i write the image to a floppy, and it boots just fine. if i > > recompiled my kernel so the zImage size is around 490kb, the > > image gets loaded just fine. > > make bzImage if someone remove zImage. the zImage built just fine. my problem is the zImage doesn't boot on a harddrive, while it's working just fine on floppy disk. imel This email was sent using http://webmail.cbn.net.id/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [RFC] linux class diagrams
sure, the gifs. i have to clean up the argouml files, there're some duplicate classes. i added tty_struct. if only i had the original c++ preprocessor. it'll be interesting to c++ code which compiles with a c compiler. imel On Thu, 1 Mar 2001, Erik Mouw wrote: > On Wed, Feb 28, 2001 at 05:47:55PM +0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > hah, i forgot the url. > > it's at http://www.trustix.co.id/~imel96/linux/ > > Nice. Can we copy them on www.kernelnewbies.org? They might be useful > for others as well. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] Single user linux
first, i think i owe you guys apology for didn't make myself clear, which is going harder if you irritated. even my subject went wrong, as the patch isn't really about single user (which confuse some people). for those who didn't read that patch, i #define capable(), suser(), and fsuser() to 1. the implication is all users will have root capabilities. then i tried to bring up the single user thing to hear opinions (not flames). and by that, i actually didn't mean to have users share the same uid/gid 0. i know somebody will need to differentiate user. so when everybody suggested playing with login, getty, etc. i know you have got the wrong idea. if i wanted to play on user space, i'd rather use capset() to set all users capability to "all cap". that's the perfect equivalent. so the user space solution (capset()) works, but then came the idea to optimize away. that's what blow everybody up. don't get me wrong, i always agree with rik farrow when he wrote in ;login: that we should build software with security in mind. but i also hate bloat. lets not go to arm devices, how about a notebook. it's a personal thing, naturally to people who doesn't know about computer, personal doesn't go with multi user. by that i mean user with different capabilities, not different persons. i haven't catch up with all my mails, but my response to some: - linux is stable not only because security. - linux was designed for multi-user, dos f.eks. is designed for personal use, so does epoc, palmos, mac, etc. - i even use plan9 with kfs restrictions disabled sometimes, cause i don't have cpu server, auth server, etc. - with that patch, people will still have authentication. so ssh for example, will still prevent illegal access, if you had an exploit you're screwed up anyway. sure httpd will give permission to everybody to browse a computer, but i don't think a notebook need to run it. so i guess i deserve opinions instead of flames. the approach is from personal use, not the usual server use. if you think a server setup is best for all use just say so, i'm listening. > It would be far more interesting to rip out all trace of security. > That would include the kernel memory access checking, parts of the > task struct, filesystem and VFS code, and surely much more. i did say it clearly that i have other changes which i know won't be a clean patch (too many #ifdefs). f.eks. on my computer i didn't even compile user.c in, i don't have user_struct. filesystem and vfs code are affected by that patch already. memory access is important of course. > Then you can try to show a measurable performance difference. nah, performance was never my consideration. i do save about 3kb from my zImage, but i'm not interested. imel (writing from a webmail) This email was sent using http://webmail.cbn.net.id/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] Single user linux
On Thu, 26 Apr 2001, Helge Hafting wrote: > The linux kernel ought to be flexible, so most people can use > it as-is. It can be used as-is for your purpose, and > it have been shown that this offer more security _without_ > inconvenience. Your patch however removes multi-user security > for the many who needs it - that's why it never will get accepted. > Feel free to run your own patched kernels - but your > patch will never make it here. i don't understand, that patch is configurable with 'n' as default, marked "dangerous". so somebody who turned on that option must be know what he's doing, doesn't understand english, or has a broken monitor. > If you really want optimization, remove all security instead of > merely killing a few basic tests. those tests responsible for almost all EACCESS & EPERM. > The notebook user might not care or understand about > multi-user security, but it is still useful. The user > have several daemons running that he don't know about, > they were installed by the distribution. > The security system can protect files from buggy > or cracked daemons. must be a devil cursed distro, distributing "single-user" kernel with live daemons. a division of redmon? > And protecting the > configuration (and essential stuff like the user's GUI) from > being deleted by user accident is still a good thing. > > The user who don't need password security can still have a "safe" > SUID admin program for necessary tasks like changing the > dialup phone number even though it resides in a protected > file. So you definitely want the protection system, even > in a "personal" appliance running linux. Because it > protects against stupid mistakes like experimenting > with editing files in the /etc directory on the notebook with > a word processor. Users don't understand why saving in > word processor format might be bad hmm, the other thing i hate is policy. ever consider that you're talking policy? maybe reboot() should sync() first? > A notebook is a particularly bad example. Those with notebooks > might not want to use passwords all the time, but it is > very convenient if you have to leave a notebook with sensitive data > with someone you don't trust. Business secrets or something > as simple as a diary. This kind of users can be logged in > all the time, mostly avoiding passwords. And log out > in those few cases they need to leave the machine in > unsafe places. and that someone who had the notebook can't access sensitive data without a passwd? that's what i'm trying to say. if you carried your server, and leave it in unsafe places, why would anybody try to crack it? just get the harddisks put it in another computer, voila. so much for security. > > - linux is stable not only because security. > Sure, but security definitely adds to its stability. i don't know what you mean by stability. if you meant linux can run a year without a reboot, what security has anything to do with stability? the kernel is stable, yes, do we here linux server got cracked yes, it's still stable though. > > - with that patch, people will still have authentication. > > so ssh for example, will still prevent illegal access, if > Nope. Someone ssh'ing into your system still > cannot guess someone elses password. They can log in > into their own account though, and abuse other > users accounts or the machine configuration because > there is no protection. Unprotected accounts only means > you get your own account _by default_, you have the > power to trash all the others. A malicious user could > even change the other users passwords and re-enable the > security system so they loose. i didn't disable password! if someone got into a personal machine through ssh by guessing, most likely that account is the owner's. who else? > > > you had an exploit you're screwed up anyway. > Many exploits are limited. Cracking a damenon running > as "nobody" or some daemon user may not be all that > satisfying - you might be unable to take over the machine. > An exploit doesn't necessarily give root access. that line was still about ssh. besides, if someone would run a server for the world, then he must had drain bamage. > You get a lot of opinions. Don't mistake them for flames > just because they disagree with everything you say. you haven't seen my inbox. > Multi-user security is useful for much more than server use. > A good "personal" setup includes at least 3 users: > * root - for administration > * the user - for running the programs the user himself use. > I.e. the word processor on a notebook, the user inteface > on a linux phone, and so on. > * a nobody user, for safer daemons. If any kind of daemon > is used at all. Surprisingly many appliances might > run a daemon - a snmp daemon, or a webserver serving > the same purpose (So your can check your home > appliance from work perhaps) but think about the idea of multi-user. it means protection for the system and other u
Re: [PATCH] Single user linux
On Wed, 25 Apr 2001, John Cavan wrote: > Several distributions (Red Hat and Mandrake certainly) offer auto-login > tools. In conjunction with those tools, take the approach that Apple > used with OS X and setup "sudo" for administrative tasks on the machine. > This allows the end user to generally administer the machine without all > the need to hack the kernel, modify login, operate as root, etc. You can > even restrict their actions with it and log what they do. > > In the end though, I really don't see the big deal with having a root > user for general home use. Even traditionally stand-alone operating > you're right, we could do it in more than one way. like copying with mcopy without mounting a fat disk. the question is where to put it. why we do it is an important thing. taking place as a clueless user, i think i should be able to do anything. i'd be happy to accept proof that multi-user is a solution for clueless user, not because it's proven on servers. but because it is a solution by definition. imel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] Single user linux
On Thu, 26 Apr 2001, [iso-8859-1] Rasmus Bøg Hansen wrote: > > i'd be happy to accept proof that multi-user is a solution for > > clueless user, not because it's proven on servers. but because it is > > a solution by definition. > > Let's turn the question the other way. It's you trying to convince > us, that everyone needs root access. What does a clueless user need root > access for? what work around what? right now it's the kernel who thinks that root is special, and applications work around that because there's a division of super-user and plain user. is that a must? it's trivial to say that in multi-user system, one user shall not mess with other user. in multi-process, a process shall not mess with other process. but when it comes to a computer which only has one user, why would it stop a user. because the kernel thinks it isn't right? if he felt like killing random process, which is owned by other than the user, is it a wrong thing to do? he owns the computer, he may do anything he wants. and i'm not even trying to convince anyone. communicating is closer. > > And if you really want everybody to have access to all files, you can > just do a 'chmod 777 /'. Perhaps set it up as a cronjob to run daily? > > Besides you write, that a distro shipping single-user is evil. So you > want the clueless user to recompile his own kernel to enable single-user iff that distro starts up daemons. > mode (why do at all call it 'single-user' when you still have different i wrote somewhere that it was my mistake to call it single-user when i mean all user has the same root cap, and reduce "user" (account) to "profile". imel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] Single user linux
On Thu, 26 Apr 2001, John Cavan wrote: > I think you have it backwards here, given that Linux works one way and you yeah, it was a patch for linux, but i wasn't thinking linux. there are quite many os out there. and i don't think they're different just because they have programmers with different intelligence level. > If you can't prove the case, I rather suspect that your patch won't make > it. Don't feel bad though, I've yet to get one through either. :o) oh no, that patch was useful to explain the idea. i don't even think it's the right way. but it's a good way to exercise the idea. well, thanks anyway. imel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
