Re: [Openxdsm-devel] Re: [PROPOSAL] Extended attributes for Posix security extensions

[Stephen C. Tweedie]

Hi,

On Thu, Oct 26, 2000 at 10:37:55PM +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:

> That's if the filesystem actually uses an EA to store the ACL. It may well
> provide another mechanism, in which case EAs just provide the
> interface.

Using EAs as an interface to ACLs seems insanely wrong to me.  What
about filesystems which implement both ACLs and named attributes as
completely separate entities?  As far as the filesystem is concerned
you'd have two totally separate interfaces, but you'd have to have the
EA interface special-case the "$ACL" name and do a dynamic translation
from some unspecified ACL binary format to whatever the fs is using
natively.

I'd much prefer not to have EAs required as the interface to ACLs, but
to keep the interfaces as distinct as possible.  Remember, you may
have filesystems which support ACLs but not named attributes too.

--Stephen
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]