Ali Bahrami wrote: > No, that's fine. Here's what I get out of reading these diffs: > > - vim treats acls as a generic blob (vim_acl_T). > > - A given platform supplies the best ACL style it > can muster, casting it to/from the generic pointer > type used by vim. > > - Your changes appear to add support for the nfsv4/zfs style > of ACL, providing get/set/free operations.
Yup. > It all seems fine. It's nice that the abstraction maps so directly > to the real operations. I trust that you set some ACLs on a test file > and verified that vim seems to honor them? Yup. > +1, unless I'm off base with the above. Cool, Thanks. Danek _______________________________________________ userland-discuss mailing list userland-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/userland-discuss
