home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky comp.unix.misc:4996 comp.unix.wizards:5595
- Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.wizards
- Path: sparky!uunet!mcsun!ieunet!tcdcs!unix1.tcd.ie!bosullvn
- From: bosullvn@unix1.tcd.ie (Bryan O'Sullivan)
- Subject: Re: Proposal: UNIX needs group-dependent umasks.
- Message-ID: <bosullvn.727651452@unix1.tcd.ie>
- Keywords: Duff Beer
- Sender: usenet@cs.tcd.ie (NN required at ashe.cs.tcd.ie)
- Nntp-Posting-Host: unix1.tcd.ie
- Organization: Computer Science Department, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland
- References: <1993Jan20.214545.22642@leland.Stanford.EDU> <lee.727634902@ceg.uiuc.edu>
- Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 21:24:12 GMT
- Lines: 27
-
- lee@ceg.uiuc.edu (Chris Lee) writes:
-
- >UNIX does not have these features -- maybe later releases
- >of UNIX (or even OSF) will have this built into it.
-
- OSF are, I believe, going to use CMU's Andrew File System as a
- basis for the DCE remote file system. AFS gives somewhat better
- coherency guarantees than NFS and, according to the papers presented
- at Winter USENIX '88 and in various journals, scales considerably
- better as well. I'm a little hazy on exactly what file protection
- extensions it provides -- certainly positive ACLs, and maybe negative
- ACLs too.
-
- Having used it, I find the idea of having to renew tokens and use
- volumes rather clumsy, but I haven't seen anything better by way
- of Unix-a-like distributed FSs (then again, I haven't looked too
- hard). File caching performance is pretty impressive, once you
- get over the delay involved in fetching a local copy of every file
- you access.
-
- The down side: you have to twiddle the kernel to add vice (the
- client part). But I think this just involves patching namei; I've
- not tried the operation myself yet.
-
- <b
- --
- SCRG, Department of Computer Science, Trinity College
-