On Fri, Mar 01, 2013 at 09:42:57AM +0100, Michal Privoznik wrote:
> On 28.02.2013 02:22, Eric Blake wrote:
> > On 02/27/2013 02:25 AM, Michal Privoznik wrote:
> >>> Are you really planning on storing a string uid:gid? Wouldn't it be
> >>> simpler to store a uid_t and gid_t as read from struct stat
On 28.02.2013 02:22, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 02/27/2013 02:25 AM, Michal Privoznik wrote:
>>> Are you really planning on storing a string uid:gid? Wouldn't it be
>>> simpler to store a uid_t and gid_t as read from struct stat, as long as
>>> the data is only in memory? And when storing the data to
On 02/27/2013 02:25 AM, Michal Privoznik wrote:
>> Are you really planning on storing a string uid:gid? Wouldn't it be
>> simpler to store a uid_t and gid_t as read from struct stat, as long as
>> the data is only in memory? And when storing the data to disk in XML to
>> survive libvirtd restarts
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 11:30:31AM +0100, Michal Privoznik wrote:
> On 27.02.2013 11:21, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 05:08:40PM +0100, Michal Privoznik wrote:
> >> Currently, if we label a file to match qemu process DAC label, we
> >> do not store the original owner anywhe
On 27.02.2013 11:21, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 05:08:40PM +0100, Michal Privoznik wrote:
>> Currently, if we label a file to match qemu process DAC label, we
>> do not store the original owner anywhere. So when relabeling
>> back, the only option we have is to relabel to r
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 05:23:18PM -0700, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 02/26/2013 09:08 AM, Michal Privoznik wrote:
> > Currently, if we label a file to match qemu process DAC label, we
> > do not store the original owner anywhere. So when relabeling
> > back, the only option we have is to relabel to roo
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 05:08:40PM +0100, Michal Privoznik wrote:
> Currently, if we label a file to match qemu process DAC label, we
> do not store the original owner anywhere. So when relabeling
> back, the only option we have is to relabel to root:root
> which is obviously wrong.
>
> However, b
On 27.02.2013 01:23, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 02/26/2013 09:08 AM, Michal Privoznik wrote:
>> Currently, if we label a file to match qemu process DAC label, we
>> do not store the original owner anywhere. So when relabeling
>> back, the only option we have is to relabel to root:root
>> which is obvio
On 02/26/2013 09:08 AM, Michal Privoznik wrote:
> Currently, if we label a file to match qemu process DAC label, we
> do not store the original owner anywhere. So when relabeling
> back, the only option we have is to relabel to root:root
> which is obviously wrong.
>
> However, bare remembering is
Currently, if we label a file to match qemu process DAC label, we
do not store the original owner anywhere. So when relabeling
back, the only option we have is to relabel to root:root
which is obviously wrong.
However, bare remembering is not enough. We need to keep track of
how many times we labe
10 matches
Mail list logo