On 2019-9-2 21:06, David Sterba wrote: > On Mon, Sep 02, 2019 at 05:57:11AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >>> +config EROFS_FS_XATTR >>> + bool "EROFS extended attributes" >>> + depends on EROFS_FS >>> + default y >>> + help >>> + Extended attributes are name:value pairs associated with inodes by >>> + the kernel or by users (see the attr(5) manual page, or visit >>> + <http://acl.bestbits.at/> for details). >>> + >>> + If unsure, say N. >>> + >>> +config EROFS_FS_POSIX_ACL >>> + bool "EROFS Access Control Lists" >>> + depends on EROFS_FS_XATTR >>> + select FS_POSIX_ACL >>> + default y >> >> Is there any good reason to make these optional these days? > > I objected against adding so many config options, not to say for the > standard features. The various cache strategies or other implementation > details have been removed but I agree that making xattr/acl configurable > is not necessary as well.
I can see similar *_ACL option in btrfs/ext4/xfs, should we remove them as well due to the same reason? Thanks, > _______________________________________________ devel mailing list de...@linuxdriverproject.org http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
