RE: ACL patchs
Bradley Baetz (Fabian.Frederick@prov-liege.be)
Mon, 11 Oct 1999 14:54:18 +0200
> There is no easy way for a filesystem to implement ACLs, which
> is what you seem to imply.
_Not_ at all ! You misunderstood my answer it seems, as what I
wanted to say so far was the need to build a new full ACL
file system (ext-2 derivative is an option).As a fact,
that concept shipped under VMS fitted perfectly that OS
because other resources worked the same way...Do you have
any project to change IPC's UGO approach ?
The support of ACLs under one isolated file system means several
things for me : you can turn the stuff the way you want to fit
ACL concept and you won't break ext-2 usual stable partitions.
IMHO you can bring up new _features_ in Linux kernel
(fortunately) even if it's not kernel cohesive but it must
come in one separated conceptual block (take a look at my
VMS'IPC prepatch to see what I mean).
> Linux should get an ACL system that covers a broad range of
> different ACL implementations for those file systems that need
> it, and should implement a resonable set of ACL features on
> ext2 (or ext3, should it ever happen). POSIX seems good; some
> small extensions seem even better.
Of course.
Regards, Fabian
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/