I'm sure this has been given thought, so I want to probe teh collective
resources. We need to have users in more than 32 groups. In fact, they
may need to be a member of MANY more groups than that.
What is the current thinking on this problem? Would it be desirable to
replace current->groups[NGROUPS] with a poibnter to an array? Thus
allowing (with libc changes) many more groups?
Comments, please.
Tim
--
Tim Hockin
Systems Software Engineer
Sun Microsystems, Cobalt Server Appliances
[email protected]
You write:
> I'm sure this has been given thought, so I want to probe teh collective
> resources. We need to have users in more than 32 groups. In fact, they
> may need to be a member of MANY more groups than that.
>
> What is the current thinking on this problem? Would it be desirable to
> replace current->groups[NGROUPS] with a poibnter to an array? Thus
> allowing (with libc changes) many more groups?
The real solution is ACLs (if you are talking filesystem permissions).
See acl.bestbits.at, I think, for ext2 ACL/EA patch.
Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger \ "If a man ate a pound of pasta and a pound of antipasto,
\ would they cancel out, leaving him still hungry?"
http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/ -- Dogbert