2016-09-21 17:40 GMT+02:00 Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>: > Miklos Szeredi <miklos@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> 3) How will richacl's fit into this? > > As best as I can read the situation richacl support has not yet been > merged into Linux yet. True. The patches are stuck in Al Viro's inbox since a very long time. > Last I was following the richacl discussion there were some fundamental > features of richacls that were incompatible with the expectations of > ordinary linux applications. Not true. > The negative acls if my memory serves. > That raised some concern if richacls could ever be safely be merged. > > As I recall Christoph Hellwig was a primary on raising those concerns, > and when I read those arguments they seemed persuasive to me. The whole point of Richacls is to be compatible with the POSIX file permission model. Entries that deny permissions are a necessary part of Richacls for various reasons. Christoph doesn't like them, but that doesn't make them any less necessary. Andreas -- 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
