samba acl support under 4-stable

[Gabriel Ambuehl]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Hello Robert,

Monday, September 03, 2001, 5:05:48 PM, you wrote:
> not block any effort to backport, as long as it addressed the above
> concerns, and would certainly want to be involved.  My
> recommendation for anyone wanting to do a backport would be that
> they get involved in making sure the 5.0-CURRENT implementation is
> really solid.  In particular, this means:

I mean I'm not Kernel developper, but reading through Jordan's text
makes me feel like the biggest obstacle for the release of 5.0 is the
non finished SMPng stuff and some ports to other platforms (including
one which isn't even really on the market now), now given that many
people probably don't need anything else than simple non SMP x86
would like to have the ACLs, how stable is the standard x86 Kernel in
CURRENT?

The thing I've been thinking about is something like a TrustedBSD
stable branch that does support the security features but only runs
on single CPU x86 and might even be stable enough to run on
production
machines. That would allow for wider testing of the ACLs
cause without any actual snapshot on current.freebsd.org people
probably won't install CURRENT just to help testing the ACLs. So what
I'm suggesting isn't a backport but rather a stripped down 4.9
running
only on platforms it can be considered to be stable.

Best regards,
 Gabriel

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.5i

iQEVAwUBO5Ojg8Za2WpymlDxAQHwRQgAnZh7FIa7jmqFJw02bxjHqc0LwyQzQXR+
qORgSZ2uT/a2RX0Jr9+ymry4XLpR+5T2kBJ16pXnIJwkVisd80owNbm4/OVsSJ6o
fuRy8o/VOKmdK6G1n+ysD5Eadvg42h7aQwDfEshyAf9wEVkKGnNGjJ3DnVumqmFs
ewcLbWs17Y01fzUSNXaAUIw77zrk7qPt5EspcxzrswRXGqx//yISklhdO/dy4leK
Gt31GcIgx9CcB9N+VeMY+Dpe/X4tJ43tY57DiTQvLoS7oU/GyWJHCv6Gh33TFBTa
eTWs9TRQRiCJH5m6xkukS7tKsNjci678bsX7z0AR7Y89VRQuIYSKlQ==
=pqeB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo at trustedbsd.org
with "unsubscribe trustedbsd-discuss" in the body of the message