From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 13 17:19:55 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BA0210656DF for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2009 17:19:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cswiger@mac.com) Received: from asmtpout022.mac.com (asmtpout022.mac.com [17.148.16.97]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E614C8FC1A for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2009 17:19:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cswiger@mac.com) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Received: from cswiger1.apple.com ([17.227.140.124]) by asmtp022.mac.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 6.3-7.03 (built Aug 7 2008; 32bit)) with ESMTPSA id <0KF000DQ6LH68850@asmtp022.mac.com> for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2009 09:19:54 -0800 (PST) Message-id: <18B3B929-DB30-4274-B698-D09B329EBF4F@mac.com> From: Chuck Swiger To: Da Rock In-reply-to: <1234506087.13067.123.camel@laptop1.herveybayaustralia.com.au> Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2009 09:19:54 -0800 References: <325E4EC8-BD2B-45C1-978C-4922D16D3A94@identry.com> <9391FD2D-59ED-455A-8C87-2854C7EF1E52@mac.com> <1234498626.13067.96.camel@laptop1.herveybayaustralia.com.au> <470E75B0-C7E9-4F05-A112-62DF01F1EA1D@mac.com> <1234500741.13067.111.camel@laptop1.herveybayaustralia.com.au> <1234506087.13067.123.camel@laptop1.herveybayaustralia.com.au> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Old user can't log in X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2009 17:19:56 -0000 On Feb 12, 2009, at 10:21 PM, Da Rock wrote: > So you're talking in terms of the FS only? Nope. A filesystem might have ACL capability available in it's specification, but without kernel and userland support, that capability isn't accessible or meaningful. > I thought you said the kernel wasn't capable? Yes, I said that the kernel has a compile-time limit as to how many groups are supported per user. > I'll have to look into this a more thoroughly, I'm > intrigued to say the least. Not to say I'll ever probably use it, > but it > does present a limitation. Sure. -- -Chuck