From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hans Reiser Subject: Re: metas Permission Denied Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2004 22:19:56 -0700 Message-ID: <4091E1FC.5080502@namesys.com> References: <16528.46352.173184.528623@laputa.namesys.com> <39CF0546-99EE-11D8-8CFE-000A95C88606@aoc.nrao.edu> <16529.9818.916980.360020@laputa.namesys.com> <200404291614.i3TGEoAI017900@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> <16529.11188.555986.964130@laputa.namesys.com> <1083256305.30344.284.camel@watt.suse.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Errors-To: flx@namesys.com In-Reply-To: <1083256305.30344.284.camel@watt.suse.com> List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" To: Chris Mason Cc: Nikita Danilov , Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, reiserfs-list Chris Mason wrote: >On Thu, 2004-04-29 at 12:22, Nikita Danilov wrote: > > >>Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu writes: >> > On Thu, 29 Apr 2004 19:59:22 +0400, Nikita Danilov said: >> > >> > > chmod u+rx backup/fsplit.c >> > > >> > > "x" bit is necessary for lookups, and "r" bit---for readdir. >> > >> > This is going to be *such* a non-starter - there's many decades of >> > "C files are mode 644 and executables are 755" tradition that this >> > will fly against. What this basically implies is that the 'execute' >> >>Eh? What I described is precisely decades old meaning of rwx bits for >>directories. >> >>Problem is that we have to fit objects that are both regular files and >>directories into access control scheme that wasn't designed for such a >>mix. I don't see better solution short of inventing new bit(s). >> >> > >Please forgive me for jumping into the end of a thread without reading >the whole thing, but it seems like the r bit should be sufficient here. >If you can read the file, you should be able to read the metas. > >x should be for execution of the file... > >-chris > > > > > > what if the file/directory contains "real" files which are not metas, and it also has a file body? This is possible in reiser4.