Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 21 Sep 1999 14:29:24 -0500 (CDT) | From | Jesse Pollard <> | Subject | Re: Ext3 filesystem info? |
| |
From: Jeff Haumont <haumont@acm.org> >The common interface wouldn't have to try to use every feature of the ACLs in the >underlying filesystem. Even a least-common-demoninator interface would be much >better than nothing. Maybe restrict to directory ACLs only, etc.
I think the common interface should be something in the middle - support for ACLs on individual files if possible. If not implemented then return ENOSYS. This would allow for a suitable generic "not implemented" message to be printed.
There appears to be some support for a VFS modification. It would allow file systems to be used with no initial alterations. One filesystem could be modified at a time to support ACLs. This would simplify implementation and debugging of the user access functions.
>Another option would be to write some massively intelligent userspace library that >could query the filesystem and divine the correct way to do things. Not something >I'd want to try to debug, verify to be correct and secure, or maintain though ...
You bet. This would look like another justification for putting it in the VFS layer anyway. The huge size of the ACL edit function alone - trying to second-guess the kernel support would be a loosing battle among version numbers of even one filesystem.
Guess I'll learn more about the VFS layer implementation to see just how hard it would be... ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jesse I Pollard, II Email: pollard@navo.hpc.mil
Any opinions expressed are solely my own.
- 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/
| |