help-hurd
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: 4th set of permission bits?


From: Ivan Jager
Subject: Re: 4th set of permission bits?
Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2000 14:59:24 -0300

Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> 
> On Fri, Dec 01, 2000 at 05:03:18PM -0300, Ivan Jager wrote:
> > Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Dec 01, 2000 at 01:14:47PM -0300, Ivan Jager wrote:
> > > > IMHO, the best solution would be to drop the last set of permissions and
> > > > port the ACL patch for Linux from http://acl.bestbits.at/ :) How hard
> > > > would that be?
> > >
> > > Show us.
> >
> > If you mean you want me to port it, I am sure I will need a lot of help.
> 
> I will tell you right now that you can't port the patch. You would need to
> write a cmpletely different implementation.
> 
> I am also saying that those goals ar enot orthogonal. The Hurd is flexible
> enough to carry both. And, as a last note, the fourthe set of permissions is
> a logical consequence of the fact that the Hurd users have uid and gid
> *sets*, which might be empty.

Does that mean the ACLs could be stored the same way, but they would be
interpreted differently?

I think I need to do some more reading... Where is that explained?

> > I asked how hard it would be because I don't know if it is just copying
> > and changing some names of variables, or if it practicaly needs to be
> > rewriten.
> 
> Why did you say that it would be the best solution then?

That *was* my opinion. Now I know better.

Also, when I said "the best" I meant "the best AFAIK", or "the best that
I know of". Isn't that implied when it follows "IMHO"?

I also learned that when I give an opinion I should give reasons for it.
;)

Anyways, sorry for the misunderstanding.
-- 
Ivan Jager



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]