Re: "Small" Bug - silly question again

[Ivan Jager <ivanjager@bigfoot.com>]

Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> > And would file access lists give even more flexibility?
> > (Sorry if this has already been explained and I missed it.)
> 
> Probably, although I don't know what it is. Maybe you want to implement it
> as a translator (would perhaps fit into shadowfs concept).

I'm not too sure I understand what access lists are. My guess is that
instead of having 3 (or 4) permision sets, you have n groups each with
thier own permission, and n users with their permissions. Of corse there
would have to be some way to change it for the not-loged-in user.

Then you could have a file that could be read by anyone in group admin,
and written by mark and joe, and not readable by andy even though he is
in group admin.

If we are going to do that it might be worth adding a few more
permission bits.

Does this sound familiar:
grant select on bar to foo
grant update ...
grant insert ...
grant all ...
grant dbadm ... (or something like that)
grant ... with grant

those probably can't be used dirrectly, but the last one could be used
with a few changes. (give someone permision to change the permisions)

This would require even more changes to utilities, but since they would
need changing anyways, and this would be a lot more flexible, it might
be worth the extra work.

-- 
Ivan Jager