On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 07:11:47PM -0700, Hans Fugal wrote: > -#define CAP_INIT_EFF_SET to_cap_t(~0&~CAP_TO_MASK(CAP_SETPCAP)) > -#define CAP_INIT_INH_SET to_cap_t(0) > +#define CAP_INIT_EFF_SET to_cap_t(~0) > +#define CAP_INIT_INH_SET to_cap_t(~0) > > Would it be inappropriate to create a kernel-patch package for this > patch? What should I call it? (I'm thinking kernel-patch-rtcap or > kernel-patch-capability)
I wonder what the reason for this patch is? Does it mean it could also be done in init, or does it mean the kernel does nut allow useful usage of capabiltiies at all w/o it, and therefore it is a bug? I mean is this broken on purpose? Greetings Bernd -- (OO) -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- ( .. ) [EMAIL PROTECTED],linux.de,debian.org} http://home.pages.de/~eckes/ o--o *plush* 2048/93600EFD [EMAIL PROTECTED] +497257930613 BE5-RIPE (O____O) When cryptography is outlawed, bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl!
