Re: enforcing DB immutability

2005-04-20 Thread Erik Mouw
On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 08:41:15AM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > [A discussion on the git list about how to provide a hardlinked file > that *cannot* me modified by an editor, but must be replaced by > a new copy.] Some time ago there was somebody working on copy-on-write links: once you modif

Re: enforcing DB immutability

2005-04-20 Thread Nick Craig-Wood
On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 09:49:48AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > perhaps having a new 'immutable hardlink' feature in the Linux VFS > > would help? I.e. a hardlink that can only be readonly followed, and > > can be removed, but cannot be chmod-ed to a

Re: enforcing DB immutability

2005-04-20 Thread Chris Wedgwood
On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 09:53:20AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > so the only sensible thing the editor/tool can do when it wants to > change the file is precisely what we want: it will copy the > hardlinked files's contents to a new file, and will replace the old > file with the new file - a copy on

Re: enforcing DB immutability

2005-04-20 Thread linux
[A discussion on the git list about how to provide a hardlinked file that *cannot* me modified by an editor, but must be replaced by a new copy.] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote all of: >>> perhaps having a new 'immutable hardlink' feature in the Linux VFS >>> would help? I.e. a hardlink that can only be

Re: enforcing DB immutability

2005-04-20 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > perhaps having a new 'immutable hardlink' feature in the Linux VFS > > would help? I.e. a hardlink that can only be readonly followed, and > > can be removed, but cannot be chmod-ed to a writeable hardlink. That i > > think would be a large enough b

Re: enforcing DB immutability

2005-04-20 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > perhaps having a new 'immutable hardlink' feature in the Linux VFS > would help? I.e. a hardlink that can only be readonly followed, and > can be removed, but cannot be chmod-ed to a writeable hardlink. That i > think would be a large enough barrier f

enforcing DB immutability

2005-04-20 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 13 Apr 2005, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > well, the 'owned by another user' solution is valid though, and doesnt > > have this particular problem. (We've got a secure multiuser OS, so can > > as well use it to protect the DB against corruptio