From: Olivier B. <ob...@ma...> - 2006-01-27 11:56:57
|
Kay Sievers <kay...@vr...> writes: > On Fri, Jan 27, 2006 at 07:05:06AM +0300, Andrey Borzenkov wrote: >> On Friday 27 January 2006 05:25, Greg KH wrote: >> > > I want to understand the reason for these device nodes since they seem >> > > to duplicate the nodes found in /proc/bus/usb. Is this just part of the >> > > long term plans to remove usbdevfs? >> > >> > They duplicate those nodes identically. But now we can use udev and pam >> > and other tools to properly set the permissions and acls on the nodes. >> > Much easier than doing it through usbfs mount permissions, which only >> > work for all usbfs devices. >> > >> >> Does Mandrake have patched kernel procfs? Not AFAIK, and we don't need that to modify owners in /proc See our list of patches here: https://cvs.mandriva.com/svn/mdv/cooker/kernel-2.6/current/PATCHES/patches/ >> they have been PAM-controlled as long as I remember. Not that I advocate >> keeping them (I do not care as long as higher-level tools work), just >> curious. > > Sure, primary ownership works as usual. We meant Access Control Lists, > for multiple users at the same time, which are nice if you use > fast-user-switching or have multi-head setups. Couldn't we use dynamic groups instead of ACLs? This would avoid running a tool to update ACLs at each device "add", and require group updates only at user login/logout. By the way, some pointers about the ACLs on tmpfs solution: http://vrfy.org/log/pam_console.html http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/1/8/231 -- Olivier Blin - Mandriva |