Re: [PROPOSAL] Extended attributes for Posix security extensions

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 02:50:32AM +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Oct 2000, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> 
> > [...] But the ACL implementation is not generic enough, IMHO.
> 
> The ACL implementation is Posix 1003.1e draft standard 17 compliant. AFAIK
> neither of the other ACL implementations (Solaris, Irix, FreBSD) can claim
> that.

Yep. That's completly right. The only problem is - even if ext2 with your
patches maps ACLs to EAs there are filesystems that do not.
IMHO iw would be better use separate syscalls for ACLs and EAs.
So a filesystem like NFSv4 could use the same ACL tools (yours)
and syscalls.

        Christoph

-- 
Always remember that you are unique.  Just like everyone else.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]