Subject: Re: lchflags(2)?
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Jason R Thorpe <firstname.lastname@example.org>
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 <email@example.com>