Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751208AbVJFDu6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Oct 2005 23:50:58 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751210AbVJFDu6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Oct 2005 23:50:58 -0400 Received: from 10.ctyme.com ([69.50.231.10]:3010 "EHLO newton.ctyme.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751208AbVJFDu5 (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Oct 2005 23:50:57 -0400 Message-ID: <43449F1E.7050802@perkel.com> Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 20:50:54 -0700 From: Marc Perkel User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.10) Gecko/20050716 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Horst von Brand CC: Lennart Sorensen , Florin Malita , nix@esperi.org.uk, 7eggert@gmx.de, lkcl@lkcl.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: what's next for the linux kernel? References: <200510060256.j962uXvl008891@inti.inf.utfsm.cl> In-Reply-To: <200510060256.j962uXvl008891@inti.inf.utfsm.cl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spamfilter-host: newton.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2182 Lines: 65 Horst von Brand wrote: >Marc Perkel wrote: > >[...] > > > >>What you don't understand is that Netware's permissions mechanish is >>totally different that Linux. A hard link in Netware wouldn't inherit >>rights the way Linux does. So the user would have rights to their hard >>link to delete that link without having rights to unlink the file. >> >> > >OK, so a "hard link" isn't (because it has separate permissions than the >original). Sorry, watered-down symlinks don't cut it. Or just by linking >the file into my place I now have rights to modify it? The later idea makes >my skin try to crawl away... > > > >>This is an important concept so pay attention. Linux stores all the >>permission to a file with that file entry. >> >> > >You are completely right: This is an extremely central concept to >everything Unix. > > > >> Netware doesn't. Netware >>calculates effective rights from the parent directories and it is all >>inherited unless files or directoies are explicitly set >>differently. So if files are added to other people folders then those >>people get rights to it automatically without having to go to the >>second step of changing the file's permissions. >> >> > >Which is a very clear explanation of how broken it all is. No wonder >NetWare is no more. Files whose persmissions change depending on which way >you look at them is a nightmare. Sure, you /can/ manage that for small(ish) >setups by brute force, but it soon has to break down. > > If you all think Netware is no more you are under an interesting illusion. Linux being cheap has cut into the little server market - but if you have thousands of servers all running off the same shared permissions systems - you just aren't going to do that off of Linux. -- Marc Perkel - marc@perkel.com Spam Filter: http://www.junkemailfilter.com My Blog: http://marc.perkel.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/