Re: Support for ACLs/non Unix style permissions in gnome-vfs

On Fri, 2002-08-09 at 19:16, snickell stanford edu wrote:
> Quoting Nils Philippsen <nils redhat de>:
> > And while I'm at it: ABI compatibility is nice, I have some ideas how
> > to
> > keep programs that use the existing GnomeVFSFileInfo::permissions
> > working while allowing (with a #define) programs to use the new API
> > as
> > well. That would require a bit of #define-trickery, ok to do it?
> The reserved members are there to preserve ABI compatibility, no need
> for #defines. If you just use one of the reserved members without
> changing its type (it should be a void * right now) you won't have any
> ABI problems I think.

What I had in mind was along the lines of having to set e.g.
GNOME_VFS_ENABLE_NEW_ACL_API in the current version to be able to use
the new API, barring access to GnomeVFSFileInfo::permissions (and vice
versa). I want to prevent that one program uses both APIs (which is
probable in a reasonably large project).

In the case of the new API, I wouldn't want the permissions object to be
a void *, though, but a correctly typed pointer. That shouldn't be a
problem as the size of pointers doesn't depend on the type they're
pointing to.

Nils Philippsen / Berliner Straße 39 / D-71229 Leonberg //
   nils wombat dialup fht-esslingen de / nils redhat de / nils lisas de
   PGP fingerprint:  C4A8 9474 5C4C ADE3 2B8F  656D 47D8 9B65 6951 3011
       Ever noticed that common sense isn't really all that common?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]