Hi Seth and others,
with recent exposure to file system ACLs (the betas of our next
release), I thought about what's barring nautilus to handle them as well
as the command line tools. After some in-house questioning, I got to
Alex Larsson who told me that while ACLs wouldn't necessarily need
gnome-vfs support it would be nice to have it -- I think it would be
cleaner in any case.
My first idea about it would be a generic, extensible permission API
where you would have "permission objects" attached to the
GnomeVFSFileInfo objects of the files. With this we could support Unix
style rwx permissions, Unix ACLs, probably Windows ACLs (if we wanted
to) and others. I'd have to exploit one of the reserved members of
GnomeVFSFileInfo for that, would that be okay?
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?
Finally, I don't have a Gnome CVS account, so I'll track the tarballs in
an own CVS repository and send patches. At least until I get a real CVS
account, that is (if my patches prove worthy enough ;-).
Nils
--
Nils Philippsen / Red Hat / nils redhat de
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- B. Franklin, 1759
PGP fingerprint: C4A8 9474 5C4C ADE3 2B8F 656D 47D8 9B65 6951 3011
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part