From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JXe8N-0000lA-VG for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 07 Mar 2008 15:05:20 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D2F60E05A8; Fri, 7 Mar 2008 15:05:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6AE1E05A8 for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2008 15:05:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4ECED65CF7 for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2008 15:05:18 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: 0.397 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.397 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=0.929, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO=2.067] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TWyvke4Nfkgk for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2008 15:05:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6800A6664F for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2008 15:05:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JXdeF-0005Y3-5n for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Fri, 07 Mar 2008 14:34:11 +0000 Received: from 212.126.163.234 ([212.126.163.234]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 07 Mar 2008 14:34:11 +0000 Received: from dev-zero by 212.126.163.234 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 07 Mar 2008 14:34:11 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Tiziano =?ISO-8859-1?Q?M=FCller?= Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Renaming the caps USE flag to libcap Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2008 15:34:02 +0100 Organization: Gentoo Message-ID: References: Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 212.126.163.234 User-Agent: KNode/0.10.9 Sender: news Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: fd9d9f60-0cc9-4779-87e1-ff981bc0adf0 X-Archives-Hash: f590225482ce645bcc846e1b7de1fb64 Diego 'Flameeyes' Petten=F2 wrote: >=20 > I'd like to propose the rename of caps USE flag to libcap. The reason > for this is that I'd like to free the "caps" USE flag from the (runtime= ) > dependency of libcap, so that, one we have the framework to do so, we > could use the "caps' USE flag to set file capabilities directly (rather > than setuid for instance). As an example: the pwsafe app suggest you have to run it suid (since it tries to lock some memory to avoid swapping), but doing 'setcap cap_ipc_lock=3Dep /usr/bin/pwsafe' is enough. > The step right afterward would be, for me, to find a way to mirror the > capabilities from within Portage. I admit I have no clue how to achieve > that for now. But at least the rename is a simple task, and I suppose > the capabilities handling _could_ be a SoC project... Well, I'm not sure whether libcap is a good choice: What about (not-yet-existing) apps which provide capability-support through another package (like a foobar language libcap-wrapper)? Should they also use libcap then? --=20 gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list