On 1/16/23 07:03, Ondrej Valousek wrote:
Is this something I would find support in both coreutils and Gnulib?
Works for me.
Though I have to wonder: why isn't this stuff in a library that Gnulib
and/or coreutils can use? It seems a bit odd to introduce a reasonably
major security feature lik
Pádraig Brady wrote:
> So as we see there are lots of "additional attributes"
> with dedicated programs to manipulate them.
> What's the big advantage of merging with ls and chmod,
> over the current situation of separate utilities?
In [1] I'm arguing:
* A feature that has impact on security, a
On 16/01/2023 15:03, Ondrej Valousek wrote:
Hi,
As per our conversation with Bruno I was thinking if it would make a sense to extend support of
ACLs in gnulib/coreutils, mainly covering "ls" (1st stage) and "chmod" (2nd
stage) with the goal to have the ACLs better understandable for end users
Ondrej Valousek wrote:
> Is this something I would find support in both coreutils and Gnulib?
Regarding Gnulib: Yes, for code that has its proper place in Gnulib, you
have my support.
Bruno
Hi,
As per our conversation with Bruno I was thinking if it would make a sense to
extend support of ACLs in gnulib/coreutils, mainly covering "ls" (1st stage)
and "chmod" (2nd stage) with the goal to have the ACLs better understandable
for end users.
For "ls" we would:
- Introduce a new fla
