Marc Perkel writes:Now of you think "outside" the Linux box" you can see where people in the real world would expect that if you have no rights to a file to read or write to it that you shouldn't be able to delete it. In the outside world it's "duh - of course"! but for thouse that are in the "Unix Cult" you can't think past inodes.
> 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.
Files are objects that you read, write and truncate. They are
represented by inodes.
Separately from that, there is an indexing structure: directory
tree. Directories map symbolical names to inodes. Obviously, adding a
reference to an index, or removing it from one requires access
permission to the _index_ rather then to the object being referenced.
That two-level model of files and indexing on top of them is essential
to Unix due to the flexibility and conceptual economy it provides.
> > Now - the idea is to create choice. If you need to emulate Unix nehavior > for compatibility that's fine. But I would migrate away from that into a > permissions paradygme that worked like Netware.
And there are people believing that ITS (or VMS, or <insert your first
passion here>...) set the standard to follow. :-)
> > So - the thread is about the future so I say - time to fix Unix.
One thing is clear: it's too late to fix Netware. Why should Unix
emulate its lethal defects?