Trever L. Adams wrote:
> On Wed, 2002-10-30 at 21:31, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>> > ext2/ext3 ACLs and Extended Attributes
>>
>> I don't know why people still want ACL's. There were noises about them
>> for samba, but I'v enot heard anything since. Are vendors using this?
>>
>
> I am sure I don't count (not being a vendor), but Intermezzo offers
> support for this (they are waiting on feature freeze to redo it to 2.5
> according to an email I have). I want this stuff. Yes, u+g+w is nice,
> but good ACLs are even better. Please, if this is technically correct
> in implementation, do put it in.
>
I agree, having them is far better then the standard u+g+w that's been
around for ages. I think it gives the "finer" grain of control over your
system that a lot of users may desire. Not to mention the fact that ACL's
are well supported by the recently merged XFS. If I'm not mistaken, AFS
uses them as well. I *really* don't see the overhead cost here in terms of
compiled kernel size when they are turned off. As for the size of the
source tarball, who cares? People should quit whining about the size of
the sources and get over it! Storage is cheap and broadband is in
widespread use.
Cheers,
Nicholas
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Oct 31 2002 - 22:00:55 EST