[Unionfs] copyup being interrupted by a signal?

[Josef Sipek]

On Mon, Mar 06, 2006 at 07:14:34PM -0500, Shaya Potter wrote:
> would it be sane to disable signals for the duration of copyup?

I think that it doesn't really make sense since:

1) You can't really defend against DOS attacks anyway

2) What if I accidentally run something like:

echo bar >> foo

where foo is a 1GB file, but I realized that I really wanted to run:

echo bar >> foobar

disabling signals would prevent me from ctrl-c'ing the process - I would
have to wait for 1GB of data to be read and written to disk. You can DOS
a non-unionfs system just as easily - imagine if signals were disabled:

while true
do
	dd if=/dev/zero of=foo bs=1024k count=1024
	rm foo
done

Just my $0.02.

Jeff.