Re: core statement on fexecve, O_EXEC, and O_SEARCH

[Aleksey Cheusov <cheusov%tut.by@localhost>]

On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 5:21 PM, Thor Lancelot Simon <tls%panix.com@localhost> 
wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 05:17:25PM +0300, Aleksey Cheusov wrote:
>>
>> On the other hand if we generalize improvements of fchdir(2) and fchroot(2)
>> (I mean EPERM if  the current working directory is not at or under the new
>> root directory), that is reimplement them with a help of kauth(9) we
>> will be able to do the same for fexecve(2).
>
> I don't think that's necessarily the case (we've discussed why earlier
> in this terribly fragmented thread).

I've reread the whole thread but I don't understand how fch* and fexec* differ.
As far as I can see all they cause the same sort of problems.
So, a solution should be the same for all of them.