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

[Stephen C. Tweedie]

Hi,

On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 01:11:44AM +0200, Ragnar Kj?rstad wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 12:24:19AM +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> > I don't think so. My suggestion would be this: All user EAs are prefixed
> > with "user." when passed to the kernel. The prefix is not actually stored
> > on the filesystem. Likewise, all root EAs are prefixed with "root.".
> 
> If they are to be "stripped" of by the kernel, would it not be better to
> keep it in a seperate field?
> 
That would be my preference, but I'm happy either way as long as we
can pass in the namespace information in some way.

> It is always a prefix and a name, right? A hirarchie is out of the
> question? (A hirarchie can of course not be represented in two fields)

Why would you want a hierarchy?  I'm not against it in principle, but
I'm definitely against complicating the interface without having any
good reason for doing so.

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