Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030322AbVJESsM (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Oct 2005 14:48:12 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030323AbVJESsM (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Oct 2005 14:48:12 -0400 Received: from inti.inf.utfsm.cl ([200.1.21.155]:7070 "EHLO inti.inf.utfsm.cl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030322AbVJESsL (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Oct 2005 14:48:11 -0400 Message-Id: <200510051847.j95IlRTS012444@laptop11.inf.utfsm.cl> To: Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton cc: Nikita Danilov , Marc Perkel , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: what's next for the linux kernel? In-Reply-To: Message from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton of "Wed, 05 Oct 2005 10:56:53 +0100." <20051005095653.GK10538@lkcl.net> X-Mailer: MH-E 7.4.2; nmh 1.1; XEmacs 21.4 (patch 17) Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 14:47:27 -0400 From: Horst von Brand X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.0b5 (inti.inf.utfsm.cl [200.1.19.1]); Wed, 05 Oct 2005 14:47:28 -0400 (CLT) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1995 Lines: 49 Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > On Wed, Oct 05, 2005 at 01:24:12PM +0400, Nikita Danilov wrote: > > Marc Perkel writes: > > [...] > > > > > Right - that's Unix "inside the box" thinking. The idea is to make the > > > operating system smarter so that the user doesn't have to deal with > > > what's computer friendly - but reather what makes sense to the user. > > > From a user's perspective if you have not rights to access a file then > > > why should you be allowed to delete it? > > Because in Unix a name is not an attribute of a file. > there is no excuse. It's not an excuse, it's part of a coherent view of how things work. Just as Netware used to have its, and DOS had its (sort of). As the world view underneath Unix, it is darn hard to "fix". [This discussion sounds quite a lot like it is /you/ who needs "fixing", i.e., first wrap your head around Unix' ways...] > selinux has already provided an alternative that is similar to NW > file permissions. Nope. SELinux provides MAC, i.e., mechanisms by which system-wide policy (not the random owner of an object) ultimately decides what operations to allow. That is not "file permissions". And yes, this is quite un-Unix-like. [...] > in what way is it possible for linux to fully support the NTFS > filesystem? If you ask me, preferably not at all, just let that unholy mess quietly go the way of the dinosaurs. Sadly, interoperability is required at times, so... -- Dr. Horst H. von Brand User #22616 counter.li.org Departamento de Informatica Fono: +56 32 654431 Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria +56 32 654239 Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile Fax: +56 32 797513 - 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/