| To: | kend@xxxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | ACLs (was Re: XFS pressure group) |
| From: | Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 28 Mar 2002 08:32:39 +1100 |
| Cc: | nic@xxxxxxxxxxx, florin@xxxxxxx, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <32832.10.20.1.46.1017241549.squirrel@webmail.xanoptix.com>; from kend@xanoptix.com on Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 10:05:49AM -0500 |
| References: | <1017238289.6621.5.camel@pyewacket> <32832.10.20.1.46.1017241549.squirrel@webmail.xanoptix.com> |
| Sender: | owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.2.5i |
On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 10:05:49AM -0500, kend@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > ... > Seriously, though -- first and foremost, I'm an XFS "user", and most > certainly am not competent to comment in-depth on kernel issues, but I'd > always been somewhat under the impression that ACLs brought up security > issues that had yet to be dealt with, and that that was a large portion of > the reason for Linus' reluctance to include it. Is this true? No. > If so, how has it been addressed? Or am I merely misguided? The latter. -- Nathan |
| Previous by Date: | Re: Can't build CVS kernels of 20020321 & 20020327, Nathan Scott |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: problem running xfs_repair, Nathan Scott |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: XFS pressure group, kend |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [Announce] XFS 1.1 Prerelease 2 available for testing, Tony Gale |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |