On Wed, May 17, 2023 at 12:45:13AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Wed, May 17, 2023 at 09:42:59AM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote: > > I have no idea about the original flame war that ended RichACLs in > > additition to having no clear clue what RichACLs are supposed to > > achieve. My current knowledge extends to "Christoph didn't like them". > > Christoph certainly doesn't like Rich ACLs, as do many other people. > > But the deal block was that the patchset: > > - totally duplicated the VFS level ACL handling instead of having > a common object for Posix and the new ACLs Which seems like a pretty obvious choice... That was the first thing I thought of doing (see earlier mail). > - did add even more mess to the already horrible xattr interface > instead of adding syscalls. Plus that was before I moved POSIX ACLs out of the xattr handlers so they would've had to get that work done first for this to not end up a horrible horrible mess...
