>
> ralf@uni-koblenz.de
>
> > ACLs were specified in POSIX 1003.1e and 1003.2c.
> > However these drafts have been dropped.
>
> Good. POSIX ACLs are awful. Somebody stop the ext2 developers before
> it is too late. With a tiny bit of thought, it should be obvious
> that the inheritance system is broken. ACL systems that are much better
> include those of NT, Netware, Digital Unix...
>
> Considering the power (yes!) and popularity of NT ACLs, they would
> be a better choice than Netware or Digital Unix ACLs.
The most powerful file-system of those mentioned is that of Netware, no
doubt. Not even NT5 will come close.
> BTW: the admin tools on NT do not expose the awesome power of the
> underlying architecture. There is more than meets the eye.
How come then that almost every professional system that uses NT (ok, it
might not be professional to use NT, but anyway...) has Netware installed
on top of it?! Security and the Filesystem/Management is the answer.
/David Weinehall
_ _
// David Weinehall <tao@acc.umu.se> /> Northern lights wander \\
// Project MCA Linux hacker // Dance across the winter sky //
\> http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/ </ Full colour fire </
-
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/