* [LSF/VM TOPIC] Re: [Lsf10-pc] Rich-acl discussion for Linus Storage and Filesystem summit
[not found] ` <1267607061.15025.11.camel@mulgrave.site>
@ 2010-03-03 14:09 ` Aneesh Kumar K. V
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Aneesh Kumar K. V @ 2010-03-03 14:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: James Bottomley, Trond Myklebust
Cc: lsf10-pc, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Ext4 Developers List
On Wed, 03 Mar 2010 14:34:21 +0530, James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-03-02 at 10:16 -0500, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> > On Tue, 2010-03-02 at 20:28 +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Suggestion for discussion at LSF summit:
> > >
> > > Rich-acl patches posted at
> > > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.ext4/17414 helps in
> > > defining a new acl format for Linux that can interoperate better with
> > > NFSv4 acl and CIFS acl. I would like have a discussion on the new acl
> >
> > What about NTFS?
> >
> > > format, rules regarding how to handle file mode changes and acl
> > > values. Also how to handle uid to nfs name@domain mapping
> > >
> > > -aneesh
> >
> > I very much second this proposal. We've been spinning our wheels on the
> > issue of support for non-posix draft acls for far too long.
>
> So could we take the proposal to the relevant list to see who else wants
> to talk about it and whether any of the ground work can be covered
> beforehand?
>
Adding fsdevel, ext4 list. samba will also be interested, but that is
subscriber only list
-aneesh
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread