Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 18:45:10 +0100 From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> To: mjacob@feral.com Cc: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.ORG>, Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org>, Dima Dorfman <dima@trit.org>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Anybody working on devd? Message-ID: <36655.1006969510@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 28 Nov 2001 09:41:00 PST." <Pine.BSF.4.21.0111280940210.28332-100000@beppo>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <Pine.BSF.4.21.0111280940210.28332-100000@beppo>, Matthew Jacob writes: >> Generally speaking, it seems desirable the devices would appear in /dev >> with conservative permissions, and then userland policy might adjust those >> permissions to be more liberal based on files in /etc, and so on. > >I think that if this is the case, there's no point in device drivers knowing >about permissions at all, and shouldn't be even *allowed* to set them. Well, true in the theoretical sense, but it makes a lot of sense for picobsd like systems that they do. As long as the default policy is (ie: becomes) configurable (see my other email), it is not harmful that the drivers gives a first stab at mode/owner/group. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?36655.1006969510>