Subject: Re: Support for ACLs
To: der Mouse <mouse@Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA>
From: Greywolf <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 03/08/2001 11:11:06
On Thu, 8 Mar 2001, der Mouse wrote:
# This sounds as though you believe that just because soeemthing is "very
# useful for some people" is reason enough for NetBSD to do it.
Actually, ACLs are not entirely loony. The ability to add a per-group
access is all well and good, but the hoops you have to go through to
say that "I want everyone EXCEPT this user to be able to access this file"
are hairy. You can't just take him out of the group, necessarily,
and for obvious reasons you can't just chown the file to him (although
chflags makes this a bit easier, now that I think about it).
# them. Indeed, I've seen messages that seem to have been written from
# an attitude that by definition, anything that attracts more users
# cannot damage the system.
# I disagree; if you want Linux, you know where to find it.
I won't argue with that one, but outside of the massive disorganisation
of Linux' userland, the majority of its weaknesses are in the kernel.
# > If you do not think putting support in the UFS layer is the right
# > solution, suggest a better one, or step up and say you do not think
# > his problem should be solved by NetBSD.
# I didn't write the double-quoted text above, but I support it.
Given chown/chgrp, chmod and chflags, I don't really care either way
as long as ACLs are, as always, _an option that I can disable_.
# I too think the NetBSD kernel is not the right place to solve this
# problem. It may be possible to do it in userland (eg, a userland Samba
# or WINS server that keeps ACLs in a parallel filesystem tree), but I
# really don't think it belongs in the kernel.
# Not that anyone gives a rat's patootie what I think, except a few other
# nutcases who want NetBSD to remain (go back to being, actually) a BSD,
# like greywolf and isildur.
Hard to say this, but if the feature makes sense AND we can do it in
a non-performance-impactive manner (i.e. the gain far outstrips the bloat),
then why not?
[Please note: I'm not turning coat, here, but some features do make sense.
Just let me disable the ones I don't use, if I want to unbloat my system.]
# der Mouse
*BSD: Perpetual performance!