Re: [PATCH] Introduce O_CLOEXEC (take >2)
- From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 15:02:35 -0400
On Thu, May 31, 2007 at 11:46:31AM -0700, Davide Libenzi wrote:
On Thu, 31 May 2007, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
Davide Libenzi wrote:
Isn't this better be a global process flag? Default should be, for legacy
reasons,
No. Policies are always wrong since it means code that cannot change
the policy (e.g, all runtime libraries) have no access to the
functionality. I cannot set the policy to default to close-on-exit in
glibc all the while the application assumes this is not the case.
I was talking for a broader usage, not only glibc centric. Most ppl
writing MT+exec apps wants all but (eventually) and handfull of files
leaking across the exec boundary.
If open (and all other syscalls that create fds) have O_CLOEXEC (and
something similar for other syscalls), then such a policy can be easily
implemented on the userland, if desired.
Jakub
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH] Introduce O_CLOEXEC (take >2)
- From: Davide Libenzi
- Re: [PATCH] Introduce O_CLOEXEC (take >2)
- References:
- [PATCH] Introduce O_CLOEXEC (take >2)
- From: Ulrich Drepper
- Re: [PATCH] Introduce O_CLOEXEC (take >2)
- From: Davide Libenzi
- Re: [PATCH] Introduce O_CLOEXEC (take >2)
- From: Ulrich Drepper
- Re: [PATCH] Introduce O_CLOEXEC (take >2)
- From: Davide Libenzi
- [PATCH] Introduce O_CLOEXEC (take >2)
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] sendfile removal
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] sendfile removal
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] Introduce O_CLOEXEC (take >2)
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] Introduce O_CLOEXEC (take >2)
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|