On Mon, 2006-03-20 at 00:43 +0100, Marcus Brinkmann wrote: > At Sun, 19 Mar 2006 17:58:16 -0500, > Thomas Schwinge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Sun, Mar 19, 2006 at 11:17:48PM +0100, Marcus Brinkmann wrote: > > > But what corresponds to the Unix group concept? I have identified two > > > semantic uses for a "group": > > > > > > 1) Sharing information and authorization. Ie, allow communication > > > among users of the same group. > > > > > > 2) Provide durable storage that is not associated with any particular > > > member of the group. > > > > 3) Hindrance of the above. > > > > #v+ > > $ groups > > users foo > > $ ls -l /tmp/not-for-fooers > > -rw----rw- 1 thomas foo 0 Mar 19 23:45 /tmp/not-for-fooers > > $ cat /tmp/not-for-fooers > > cat: /tmp/not-for-fooers: Permission denied > > #v- > > I'm disgusted!
Oh, it gets better! For this scenario the access() system call will give the wrong answer on many systems! But yes, this outcome is entirely buggered, and I don't think that anybody would argue in its favor. shap _______________________________________________ L4-hurd mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/l4-hurd
