Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 19:24:13 -0700 (PDT) From: Brooks Davis <brooks@one-eyed-alien.net> To: Pat Dirks <pwd@apple.com> Cc: FreeBSD Hackers <FreeBSD-Hackers@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: Apple's planned appoach to permissions on movable filesystems Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.10.9910061921020.28423-100000@orion.ac.hmc.edu> In-Reply-To: <199910070022.RAA26277@scv3.apple.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 6 Oct 1999, Pat Dirks wrote: > I'm sorry I didn't mention it in my original post but the plan is that > whenever a filesystem is "adopted" and the permissions are overwritten > the filesystem's ID is changed to prevent it being recognized as "local" > to any systems that previously knew it. If the filesystem's "adopted" > while retaining the privileges, the systems that recognize the filesystem > as "local" must be able to make sense of the same set of IDs (because > they're all from the same source, for instance) and it makes sense to > leave the filesystem ID unchanged. It must be possible to have a disk > that I can swap between two systems here on the floor when I know there > are no conflicting name <-> ID mappings, in which case the two systems > must know the filesystem in question by the same filesystem ID. One question, does the design take in to account a group of machines which share a set of fs IDs? I ask because otherwise, you couldn't have adopted filesystems that work in a computer lab environment where you have no choice to assume all the machines are identical without some really extreme pain. -- Brooks To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.4.10.9910061921020.28423-100000>