Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030411AbVJEWs6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Oct 2005 18:48:58 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030413AbVJEWs6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Oct 2005 18:48:58 -0400 Received: from free.hands.com ([83.142.228.128]:26295 "EHLO free.hands.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030411AbVJEWs5 (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Oct 2005 18:48:57 -0400 Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 23:48:47 +0100 From: Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton To: Lennart Sorensen Cc: Marc Perkel , Al Viro , Rik van Riel , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: what's next for the linux kernel? Message-ID: <20051005224847.GN10538@lkcl.net> References: <20051002204703.GG6290@lkcl.net> <4342DC4D.8090908@perkel.com> <4343F815.4000208@perkel.com> <20051005161527.GU7992@ftp.linux.org.uk> <4343FE1C.7090700@perkel.com> <20051005193024.GG8011@csclub.uwaterloo.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20051005193024.GG8011@csclub.uwaterloo.ca> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i X-hands-com-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-From: lkcl@lkcl.net Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1338 Lines: 31 On Wed, Oct 05, 2005 at 03:30:24PM -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote: > On Wed, Oct 05, 2005 at 09:23:56AM -0700, Marc Perkel wrote: > > That's not the point. The point is that Netware has a far superior > > permission system and I am suggesting the the Linux community learn from > > it and take advantage of seeing what better looks like and improving itself. > > Linux is compatible with unix applications. Netware is not. Supporting > some useless netware feature at the expense of posix/unix compatibility > would be insane. > > If you can't do it with unix permissions or unix permissions + ACL, you > don't need to do it at all most likely, and even more likely you the bastion sftp example i gave which required selinux on top of a much broader set of POSIX file permissions demonstrates the fallacy of your statement. try to achieve the same effect with POSIX - even POSIX ACLs (uploader only has create and write, not read, not delete; downloader has read and delete, not write, not create) and you will fail, miserably, because under POSIX, write implies create. l. - 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/