On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 05:21:51PM -0500, Nicolas Williams wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 03:09:22PM -0700, Ralph Böhme wrote:
> > > Keep in mind that Windows lacks a mode_t. We need to
> > > interop with Windows.
> >
> > Oh my, I see. Another itch to scratch. Now at least Windows users are
> >
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 03:09:22PM -0700, Ralph Böhme wrote:
> > Keep in mind that Windows lacks a mode_t. We need to
> > interop with Windows.
>
> Oh my, I see. Another itch to scratch. Now at least Windows users are
> happy while me and mabye others are not.
Yes. Pardon me for forgetting to m
> Keep in mind that Windows lacks a mode_t. We need to
> interop with Windows.
Oh my, I see. Another itch to scratch. Now at least Windows users are happy
while me and mabye others are not.
-r
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discus
Keep in mind that Windows lacks a mode_t. We need to interop with
Windows. If a Windows user cannot completely change file perms because
there's a mode_t completely out of their reach... they'll be frustrated.
Thus an ACL-and-mode model where both are applied doesn't work. It'd be
nice, but it
> "rb" == Ralph Böhme writes:
rb> The Darwin kernel evaluates permissions in a first
rb> match paradigm, evaluating the ACL before the mode
well...I think it would be better to AND them together like AFS did.
In that case it doesn't make any difference in which order you do it
becau