Re: understanding Linux capabilities brokenness

[Kyle Moffett]

On Aug 9, 2005, at 11:16:33, Christopher Warner wrote:
> In my observer pragmatic view; yes. On many occasion, i've come to CAP
> calls only to be frustrated with the sheer disconnect of it all. It
> simply doesn't work. If it means having to break posix conformance  
> for a
> working implementation. Then so be it.
>
> On Tue, 2005-08-09 at 00:46 -0400, James Morris wrote:
>
> > Let me play the Devil's advocate here.
> >
> > Should we be thinking about deprecating and removing capabilities  
> > from
> > Linux?

One brief suggestion:

A key/token interface was recently introduced that might be useful to  
allow
a simple new inheritance model for "capabilities", "roles",  
"rootperms" or
whatever other abstraction you create.

Cheers,
Kyle Moffett

--
There are two ways of constructing a software design. One way is to  
make it so
simple that there are obviously no deficiencies. And the other way is  
to make
it so complicated that there are no obvious deficiencies.  The first  
method is
far more difficult.
  -- C.A.R. Hoare


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/