Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 22 Sep 1999 08:01:17 -0500 (CDT) | From | Jesse Pollard <> | Subject | Re: Ext3 filesystem info? |
| |
From: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu> >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. > >The problem is that systems that use per-file ACL's are very different >from systems that use directory ACL's --- apples and oranges. You can't >map one to the other; there is no least common denominator.
Hmm. How many different classes are there? POSIX - NTFS (should be), IRIX/Unicos, Solaris, HPUX Directory only - AFS/DFS, (does the Andrew FS fit here)? others? no acls - FAT16/32 ?
How many would have to be supported... How about supporting POSIX, and possibly one other...?
Granted - one option is emulating ACLs in a file system that doesn't natively support them is possible. One approach is to allow the FS implementation to use a "reserved" file to store ACL information. This file might not be available to users of Linux, but would allow for ACLs. I would not reccommended it for removable media, since the media could be taken to a non-linux OS and bypassed. Of course - physical possession of media invalidates the ACLs anyway. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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/
| |