| To: | Stephen Lord <lord@xxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Chattr |
| From: | Stephen Lord <lord@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | 30 Apr 2002 19:04:33 -0500 |
| Cc: | Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>, Ethan Benson <erbenson@xxxxxxxxxx>, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <1020210550.1179.3.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <1020111402.18036.0.camel@UberGeek> <1020174674.24262.0.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20020430062608.M21791@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1020178382.24279.31.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20020430232706.A28044@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20020430143115.O21791@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20020501014919.A12139@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1020210550.1179.3.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Tue, 2002-04-30 at 18:49, Stephen Lord wrote: > > I dug some more and there does not appear to be checking on unused bits > in the di_flags field of the on disk inode, although that does not > include xfs_check which is a rather byzantine chunk of code. So it > might be possible to use a bit in here. Like I said though, right > now I am not going to get near something like this for quite a while. > > Andi, is immutable checking all done above the vfs or do filesystems > have to enforce it as well? > > Steve > OK, I answered that myself - maybe we can do this quickly - provided chattr does not check the filesystem type it is applied too. Steve |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Chattr, Stephen Lord |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Chattr, Andi Kleen |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Chattr, Stephen Lord |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Chattr, Andi Kleen |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |