Quoting Miklos Szeredi ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > > > MNT_USER and MNT_USERMNT? I claim no way will people keep those
> > > > straight. How about MNT_ALLOWUSER and MNT_USER?
> > >
> > > Umm, is "allowuser" more clear than "usermnt"? What is allowed to the
> >
> > I think so, yes. One makes it c
Quoting Miklos Szeredi ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > > From: Miklos Szeredi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >
> > > If MNT_USERMNT flag is not set in the target vfsmount, then
> >
> > MNT_USER and MNT_USERMNT? I claim no way will people keep those
> > straight. How about MNT_ALLOWUSER and MNT_USER?
>
> Umm
> > > MNT_USER and MNT_USERMNT? I claim no way will people keep those
> > > straight. How about MNT_ALLOWUSER and MNT_USER?
> >
> > Umm, is "allowuser" more clear than "usermnt"? What is allowed to the
>
> I think so, yes. One makes it clear that we're talking about allowing
> user (something
> > From: Miklos Szeredi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > If MNT_USERMNT flag is not set in the target vfsmount, then
>
> MNT_USER and MNT_USERMNT? I claim no way will people keep those
> straight. How about MNT_ALLOWUSER and MNT_USER?
Umm, is "allowuser" more clear than "usermnt"? What is allowed
Quoting Miklos Szeredi ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> From: Miklos Szeredi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> If MNT_USERMNT flag is not set in the target vfsmount, then
MNT_USER and MNT_USERMNT? I claim no way will people keep those
straight. How about MNT_ALLOWUSER and MNT_USER?
-serge
> unprivileged mounts w
From: Miklos Szeredi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
If MNT_USERMNT flag is not set in the target vfsmount, then
unprivileged mounts will be denied.
By default this flag is cleared, and can be set on new mounts, on
remounts or with the MS_SETFLAGS option.
Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
6 matches
Mail list logo