>Peter Tribble wrote: >> On 3/23/07, Mark Shellenbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> The original plan was to allow the inheritance of owner/group/other >>> permissions. Unfortunately, during ARC reviews we were forced to remove >>> that functionality, due to POSIX compliance and security concerns. >> >> What exactly is the POSIX compliance requirement here? >> >The ignoring of a users umask.
Which is what made UFS ACLs useless until we "fixed" it to break POSIX semantics. (I think we should really have some form of uacl which, when set, forces the umask to 0 but which is used as default acl when there is no acl present) Casper _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
