On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 02:06:08PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote: > On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 09:50:42AM -0700, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote: > > Howdy, > > > > I'm curious if there is any plans to add extended acls ala AFS? The > > reason I ask is that it seems in Linux we don't seem have moved off of > > POSIX style acls and I think there is definitely at least from my > > perspective that having a richer set of acl would be needed. For > > instance, we would need acls to deal with controlled countries if we > > are sharing data with them etc. It is a big shame that there is no > > RFC for extended ACLs. > > > > Also, I would like to help out with development, I'm a newbie as far > > as kernel level hacking goes. If there is a place I can go that I can > > start off small that would be lovely. > > > > Extending ACLs beyond POSIX ACLs is a more generic topic that should probably be > discussed elsewhere, perhaps linux-fsdevel. Its not going to do much good to > implement yet another extended ACL implementation in BTRFS if no other Linux fs > has the ability to use the same feature, so figuring out the details of > extending ACLs should be done before doing them in btrfs. Thanks, > I'd agree with this. The idea behind the btrfs acl/xattr implementation is to be generic enough to support whatever new ideas people come up with. But, I don't intend on driving new acl frameworks through btrfs before they are available in other filesystems. -chris -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
