Re: [PATCH 0/6] Protect fork() against dll- and exe-updates.

[Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin at cygwin dot com>]

On Mar 30 11:55, Daniel Colascione wrote:
> 
> 
> On 03/30/2016 11:53 AM, Michael Haubenwallner wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > this is the updated and split series of patches to use hardlinks
> > for creating the child process by fork(), in reply to
> > https://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-developers/2016-01/msg00002.html
> > https://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-developers/2016-03/msg00005.html
> > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.os.cygwin.devel/1378
> > 
> > Thanks for review!
> > /haubi/
> > 
> > 
> 
> Creating a new process now requires a write operation on the filesystem
> hosting the binary? Seriously? I don't think that's worth it no matter
> the other benefits.

I'm with you on that, but as long as the entire functionality is
*optional* and does *not* affect environments not using it, it should
be ok.

What I'm concerned about is the size of the patches required to make
this stuff work.  I have to review this carefully but I need some time.


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature