--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 09:02:41 PDT, Marc Perkel said: > > > Kyle, thinking further outside the box, files > would no > > longer have owners or permissions. Nor would > > directories. People, groups, managers, and other > > objects with have permissions. > > You gotta think *way* out of the box to come up with > a system where a "file" > isn't an object that can have some sort of ACL or > permissions on it. >
Yep - way outside the box - and thus the title of the thread. The idea is that people have permissions - not files. By people I mean users, groups, managers, applications etc. One might even specify that there are no permission restrictions at all. Part of the process would be that the kernel load what code it will use for the permission system. It might even be a little perl script you write. Also - you aren't even giving permission to access files. It's permission to access name patterns. One could apply REGEX masks to names to determine permissions. So if you have permission to the name you have permission to the file. Hard links would be multiple names pointing to the same file. Simlinks would be name aliases. Marc Perkel Junk Email Filter dot com http://www.junkemailfilter.com ____________________________________________________________________________________ Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story. Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games. http://sims.yahoo.com/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
