Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 11:39:10 -0500 From: David Schultz <das@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Ivan Voras <ivoras@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Directory rename semantics. Message-ID: <20081107163910.GA7007@zim.MIT.EDU> In-Reply-To: <gf168k$48o$1@ger.gmane.org> References: <20081027193545.GA95872@pin.if.uz.zgora.pl> <20081028161855.GA45129@zim.MIT.EDU> <20081106192829.GA98742@pin.if.uz.zgora.pl> <20081106195558.GG2281@submonkey.net> <gf168k$48o$1@ger.gmane.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Nov 07, 2008, Ivan Voras wrote: > That would be desirable if we want file system semantics to be a > property of the OS instead of individual file systems. (Though I don't > know if there's ever been a conscious decision about this particular > goal). I don't agree with this. The access control rules are fundamentally a property of the filesystem. Nobody expects msdosfs or ntfs to have the same semantics as UFS, for instance. Furthermore, even if you hacked up all the local filesystems to support the "FreeBSD rules" (as a recent commit seems to have done), you'd still get different semantics for remote NFS and AFS mounts.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20081107163910.GA7007>