lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Mar]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH v18 00/22] Richacls (Core and Ext4)
    On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 08:45:14AM -0700, Jeremy Allison wrote:
    > On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 12:11:03AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
    > > People have long learned that we only have 'alloc' permissions. Any
    > > model that mixes allow and deny ACE is a mistake.
    >
    > People can also learn and change though :-). One of the
    > biggest complaints people deploying Samba on Linux have is the
    > incompatible ACL models.

    Just to confirm: I see this a lot in the field. NFSv4 ACLs, while not a
    perfect match for NTFS ACLs are a lot closer much more usable to people
    who want to serve Windows clients.

    Also in the pure linux world there is a lot that you can not express
    with just rwx, sgid, sticky bits and friends. If you want the additional
    functionality of the richacl bits, I would call it a big mistake to
    omit negative aces, if just for the reason not to create yet another
    ACLs flavor.

    > Whilst I have sympathy with your intense dislike of the
    > Windows ACL model, this comes down to the core of "who
    > do we serve ?"

    The world has enough confusion around ACL semanics, please do not add
    more to it by creating your own model of the day.

    Volker

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2016-03-15 22:21    [W:4.120 / U:0.004 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site