Subject: Re: lchflags(2)?
To: None <>
From: Jason R Thorpe <>
List: tech-kern
Date: 04/20/2000 08:14:31
On Wed, Apr 19, 2000 at 05:31:26PM -0700, Bill Studenmund wrote:

 > Why do we want it? (*) I thought that one of the big decisions at Berkeley
 > when making symbolic links was that they wouldn't have their own
 > permissions, and that only the permissions on the referenced node would
 > matter. ?? I don't have all of the elements of the arguement with me, but
 > it seemed like things just got really messy if people tried to rely on
 > permissions on symbolic links..

I think the idea here is now you can make it so even root can't change
where a symbolic link points to if the link itself is immutable, i.e.
a security feature.

        -- Jason R. Thorpe <>