[openbeos] Re: status of OpenBeOS
- From: "Axel Dörfler" <axeld@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 08 May 2003 11:24:00 +0200 CEST
François Revol <revol@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> En réponse à Leon Timmermans <openbeos@xxxxxxxxx>:
> > Permission bytes are really outdated.
> > Most Multi user OS'es are slowly going to ACL's , it really is a
> > more
> > flexible solution.
> > permission bits really are too limited!
> > We'd better skip that phase.
> I know I may be "old school" (hmm I'm only 24, but hey...), but I
> don't
> find that many pros to ACLs...
> Anyway I don't mind having ACLs implemented in the filesystem (even,
> the attributes really make a nice place to put them (and the linux
> proposed implementation also implements filesystem attributes on
> purpose).
> But I don't feel ok adding ACLs to areas, ports and semaphores...
> it's really overkill and wouldn't just work IMO.
> On the opposite adding a perm byte and checking perms accordingly to
> UIDs/GIDs shouldn't impact performance that much.
ACLs are also slower to parse - you probably don't want to have them in
a high speed environment, such as ports and semaphores are.
Adios...
Axel.
Other related posts:
