Re: POSIX ACL API in glibc?

[Andreas Jaeger <aj at suse dot de>]

"Mark Brown" <bmark@us.ibm.com> writes:

>> in our current distributions the subset of ACL manipulation functions 
> defined 
>> in POSIX 1003.1e draft 17 is located in a separate library <libacl.so>. 
> I 
>> think these functions should become part of glibc. What's the official 
> glibc 
>> position about this?
>> 
>> The current implementation might not be ready for glibc out of the box, 
> but we 
>> at SuSE (Andreas Jaeger and myself) would be willing to work on fixing 
> the 
>> remaining issues.
>
> This document never became a standard, and is not going to be anytime 
> soon.
> (see current IEEE POSIX status at http://www.pasc.org/standing/sd11.html)
>
> I recommend strongly against this.

AFAIK this is the best current available interface.  We can either use
implement the draft in glibc (where those functions belong IMO), or
leave it to somebody else to implement and provide them.

IMO the questions are:
- Should the ACL functions implemented according to the draft?
- Or is there a better userland interface?
- Should this interface go into glibc?
- Is this the appropriate time to add the interfaces to glibc?

Andreas
-- 
 Andreas Jaeger
  SuSE Labs aj@suse.de
   private aj@arthur.inka.de
    http://www.suse.de/~aj