Re: Thinking outside the box on file systems
Alan <alan <at> clueserver.org>
2007-08-18 23:26:21 GMT
On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 13:22 -0400, Kyle Moffett wrote:
> On Aug 15, 2007, at 13:09:31, Marc Perkel wrote:
> > The idea is that people have permissions - not files. By people I
> > mean users, groups, managers, applications
> > etc. One might even specify that there are no permission
> > restrictions at all. Part of the process would be that the kernel
> > load what code it will use for the permission system. It might even
> > be a little perl script you write.
> > Also - you aren't even giving permission to access files. It's
> > permission to access name patterns. One could apply REGEX masks to
> > names to determine permissions. So if you have permission to the
> > name you have permission to the file.
> Please excuse me, I'm going to go stand over in the corner for a minute.
> *hahahahahaa hahahahahaaa hahaa hoo hee snicker sniff*
> *wanders back into the conversation*
> Sorry about that, pardon me.
> I suspect you will find it somewhat hard to convince *anybody* on
> this list to put either a regex engine or a Perl interpreter into the
> kernel. I doubt you could even get a simple shell-style pattern
> matcher in. First of all, both of the former chew up enormous gobs
> of stack space *AND* they're NP-complete. You just can't do such
> matching even in polynomial time, let alone something that scales
> appropriately for an OS kernel like, say, O(log(n)).