Re: [Gnu-arch-users] extended attributes

[Andrew Suffield]

On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 04:47:28PM -0500, Chris Mason wrote:
> On Tue, 2004-01-06 at 16:42, Tom Lord wrote:
> >     > From: Colin Walters <address@hidden>
> > 
> >     >> and a flat-namespace of attributes.
> > 
> >     > At least on Linux now, the namespace is subdivided at the toplevel; it
> >     > is separated into "user", "system", and "security".  The difference
> >     > between "system" and "secure" is that the security namespace is only
> >     > used for LSM modules.
> > 
> > It's primarily "user" and secondarilly "security" (i thought they were
> > called "trusted") attributes that I object to.   "System" attributes
> > seem actually useful (ACLs being an example).
> 
> People have been debating EA usage and semantics for quite a while, and
> that's not going to change any time soon.  For right now, I'd suggest
> something like this:
> 
> 1) support the acls, they're well understood

The right way to support ACLs on linux is to support EAs. Otherwise
you either waste time implementing the same stuff N times over, or you
only support one ACL scheme.

-- 
  .''`.  ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
 : :' :  http://www.debian.org/ |
 `. `'                          |
   `-             -><-          |

signature.asc
Description: Digital signature