Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2004 07:48:58 -0600 From: Danny MacMillan <flowers@users.sourceforge.net> To: Marty Landman <MLandman@face2interface.com>, Mikkel Christensen <mikkel@talkactive.net>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Suexec with Apache 1.3.29 Message-ID: <opr69vbwrercgix0@shawmail> In-Reply-To: <6.0.0.22.0.20040429140657.11cf1120@pop.face2interface.com> References: <200404262126.36157.mikkel@talkactive.net> <200404291406.58150.mikkel@talkactive.net> <6.0.0.22.0.20040429101444.0e68a6a0@pop.face2interface.com> <200404291713.13999.mikkel@talkactive.net> <6.0.0.22.0.20040429140657.11cf1120@pop.face2interface.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 29 Apr 2004 14:20:14 -0400, Marty Landman <MLandman@face2interface.com> wrote: > > ... > > On the side, this makes me wonder what the philosophy is on Windows > servers where the whole permissions concept is nonexistent afaik. Actually, server-side Windows has had much more sophisticated filesystem permissions than the standard Unix file permissions since NT, when it began using ACLs. The addition of filesystem ACLs to FreeBSD is much more recent. That's about the extent of my knowledge; it's probable that other Unix or Unix-like operating systems were using filesystem ACLs earlier than FreeBSD. -- Danny
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?opr69vbwrercgix0>