Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 15:02:20 -0800 (PST) From: Sean Eric Fagan <sef@kithrup.com> To: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: "JAIL" code headed for -current. Message-ID: <199901272302.PAA02846@kithrup.com> In-Reply-To: <199901271944.LAA15317.kithrup.freebsd.current@kithrup.com> References: <29763.917434096.kithrup.freebsd.current@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In article <199901271944.LAA15317.kithrup.freebsd.current@kithrup.com> you write: >>all over the kernel: >> >> suser(NOJAIL, bla, bla); >>or >> suser(0, bla, bla); >Oh, goody, more gratuitious incomaptibilities with everyone else. And to followup to my own message, since nobody else has: This is stupid. While I don't object to the concept (and even know people who have requested it), that particular implementation sucks. It breaks an existing API *and* ABI. I would suggest using a different routine name than suser(); suser() can be made into a macro or stub routine that calls the new routine with a first argument of 0 (or, of course, both a macro *and* a stub routine). Any time there's a change, "all over the kernel," THIS SHOULD RAISE WARNING FLAGS, PEOPLE! To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199901272302.PAA02846>