> I hate to point this out... but if the objection is to configuration
> files, then what about /etc/fstab and the mount options that allow me to
> mount CD-ROM drives and MS-DOS/FAT32 partitions as various users with
> various permissions?
In Unix, permissions on files are part of the files, not in some
configuration file. /etc/fstab is a configuration file for mount(8), the
information there can't be sensibly mapped on Unix owner/permissions. BTW,
the entries there allow you to mount _iff_ you have permissions on the
devices themselves. The permission bits are the systems' last (only?) line
of defense against miscreants; permissions of devices are extremely
critical, much more so than even the most critical normal files. Fooling
around with this if there is no *extremely* good reason is out. Needless to
say, I've seen only rather weak reasons for some scheme like devfs.
> The use of a config file to determine permissions/ownership is not foreign
> to the kernel or filesystems.
Name one use of configuration files for local permissions/ownership on
Unix/Linux.
-- Dr. Horst H. von Brand mailto:vonbrand@inf.utfsm.cl 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.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/