Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 12:25:57 +0300 From: "Alexander V. Tischenko" <tischenko@intech.hway.ru> To: "Nate Williams" <nate@mt.sri.com>, "Terry Lambert" <tlambert@primenet.com> Cc: <sos@freebsd.dk>, <julian@whistle.com>, <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: SUID-Directories patch Message-ID: <199711140924.MAA00188@thorin.hway.ru>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> From: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> > To: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> > Cc: sos@freebsd.dk; julian@whistle.com; hackers@FreeBSD.ORG > Subject: Re: SUID-Directories patch > > > One of the main incentives for commercial entities to give code > > back is offloading of maintenance. You can of course pick and > > choose what you want to take, but the fix seems generically > > useful > > And is in 3.0-current, but doesn't belong in 2.2. On the flip side, > just because a commercial entity donates code doesn't mean we should > take it into the source tree lock/stock/and barrel. > > > > Nate I am not shure people running network file servers will be eager to upgrade to _ANY_ new version unless expressely needed (i will not for shure!), so to have an incorporated patch for 2.2 that will solve administrative problems IS a good thing and also a must. And as for 3.0 - it is very unstable yet and shurely can't be used for building corporate heavy load servers. IMHO, the patch MUST be incorporated. Alexander V. Tischenko.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199711140924.MAA00188>