[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: How to add confinement to the Hurd?
From: |
Marcus Brinkmann |
Subject: |
Re: How to add confinement to the Hurd? |
Date: |
Mon, 01 May 2006 01:34:28 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Wanderlust/2.14.0 (Africa) SEMI/1.14.6 (Maruoka) FLIM/1.14.7 (Sanjō) APEL/10.6 Emacs/21.4 (i486-pc-linux-gnu) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI) |
At Sun, 30 Apr 2006 18:24:19 -0400,
"Jonathan S. Shapiro" <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 2006-04-30 at 22:29 +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> > At Sun, 30 Apr 2006 20:29:28 +0200,
> > Pierre THIERRY <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> > > 2) If someone implements [confinement] will it be integrated in the Hurd,
> > > even
> > > if disabled by default?
> >
> > This doesn't even make sense if the issue were not contentious.
>
> I believe that Pierre is asking "If someone implements it, will the Hurd
> designers reject integrating it because of politics?" (Please note:
> Marcus himself described this as a decision motivated by the politics of
> ownership).
>
> I think this is a perfectly legitimate question. What is your response?
You said in another mail:
> I do not believe that
> true confinement can be added to the system later in any practical
> sense. Architecting it out is, for all practical purposes, banning it.
I said, many times now, that I do not know a legitimate use case that
is relevant to the GNU Hurd. I have put up a challenge to find one.
Assuming that no legitimate use case is found, and that you are right
that introducing this feature means a fundamental shift in the
over-all system design, then the answer is clearly that the patch
would be rejected for technical reasons, independent of any political
evaluation.
Thanks,
Marcus
Re: How to add confinement to the Hurd?, Pierre THIERRY, 2006/04/30