Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 2 Nov 2002 19:12:24 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 2 Nov 2002 19:12:24 -0500 Received: from 1-064.ctame701-1.telepar.net.br ([200.181.137.64]:3745 "EHLO 1-064.ctame701-1.telepar.net.br") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 2 Nov 2002 19:12:23 -0500 Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2002 22:18:22 -0200 (BRST) From: Rik van Riel X-X-Sender: riel@imladris.surriel.com To: Linus Torvalds cc: "Theodore Ts'o" , Dax Kelson , Rusty Russell , , Subject: Re: Filesystem Capabilities in 2.6? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: X-spambait: aardvark@kernelnewbies.org X-spammeplease: aardvark@nl.linux.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1022 Lines: 27 On Sat, 2 Nov 2002, Linus Torvalds wrote: > Clearly inode numbers are a bad way to handle it, but I don't think > inode attributes are that great either. I would personally prefer > directory entry attributes, so that the same file can show up with > different behaviour in different places. I'm sure we can come up with even more confusing behaviour if we want, but it'll take some serious creativity. Sure it's more flexible, but I wonder how many userland programs will be broken if we change the permission model and how well users can protect their data this way. regards, Rik -- Bravely reimplemented by the knights who say "NIH". http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/ Current spamtrap: october@surriel.com - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/