On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 03:45:19PM -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote: > On Thu, 2006-08-10 at 11:06 -0700, Bryan Henderson wrote: > > > What you're describing is not a need to perform operations as another > > user, but a need to perform them with DAC_OVERRIDE capability. In Linux, > > having uid 0 buys you nothing but access to files owned by uid 0. > > Sorry, but CAP_DAC_OVERRIDE can, and usually will, be overridden in a > typical selinux environment. Hrm. > Josef, if you really need to do this hidden directory creation (which is > also something which is not supported by all filesystems, BTW - remember > FAT and its 8+3 filenames? I know. But when you look at the number of file systems that have such silly restriction, and compare it to say xattr availability (not to mention the fact that you can have a file system which has xattr code, but it was compiled without it) what's more likely to be a problem? > ) then why not use that as a flag to signal that the directory is visible > to unionfs rather than have it signal invisibility? Then leave the whole > issue of whether or not to set it to the user. If I understand this correctly, you are suggesting inverting the meaning? It is not so much of a (in)visibility flag as a opaque vs. translucent flag. It seems like this would waste many inodes, but I'll keep it in mind. Josef "Jeff" Sipek. -- Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one. - Albert Einstein - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
