Date: Thu, 26 Dec 1996 23:26:45 -0700 From: Warner Losh <imp@village.org> To: davidn@sdev.usn.blaze.net.au (David Nugent) Cc: owensc@enc.edu (Charles Owens), joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de (Joerg Wunsch), freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org (FreeBSD hackers), ben@narcissus.ml.org Subject: Re: multi-group file access techniques / directory hardlinks Message-ID: <E0vdVkj-0001hq-00@rover.village.org> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 27 Dec 1996 14:00:01 %2B1100." <Mutt.19961227140001.davidn@sdev.blaze.net.au> References: <Mutt.19961227140001.davidn@sdev.blaze.net.au> <199612262141.WAA00148@uriah.heep.sax.de> <Pine.FBS.3.93.961226183435.24907A-100000@dingo.its.enc.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <Mutt.19961227140001.davidn@sdev.blaze.net.au> David Nugent writes: : Unlike the 200 limit, though, a change here will affects the : kernel, not just userland code. There may not be a way of : making it "unlimited" without some significant redesign which : may break POSIX or other design specifications (I don't know), : but afaik there's no reason that this small limit could be raised : to, say, 64. But beyond a solution that involves lifting it to a : ridiculously high number, whatever limit is set is going to be : arbitrary. NFS v2 has hard limits in the number of groups a user may belong to, if memory serves me correctly. Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?E0vdVkj-0001hq-00>