On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 03:17:35PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > > I see your point. But then this is really not a security issue, but > > > an "are you sure you want to format C:" style protection for the > > > user's own sake. Adding a mount option (checked by the library) for > > > this would be fine. E.g. with "mount_nonempty" it would not refuse to > > > mount on a non-leaf dir, and README would document, that using this > > > option might cause trouble. Otherwise the mount would be refused with > > > a reference to the above option. > > > > IMO that should be a generic mount option, not FUSE specific. > > Maybe the default could vary for each fs, but I'd vote against that.
Why a mount option at all? Why not just a switch for the mount utility? > The option only makes sense with the default being restrictive. But > making that default for all filesystems can't be done, because that > would immediately break thousands of existing installations. I think it is acceptable to change this behaviour in a new version of the mount utility. One could considder ignoring the restriction when running with "-a" or when running as root - that would reduce or eliminate the problems with the transition. However, if this is implemented in mount itself, it is totally orthogonal to the FUSE merge discussion. -- Ragnar Kjørstad Software Engineer Scali - http://www.scali.com Scaling the Linux Datacenter - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
