Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Unsubscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.cygnus.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>,
	<http://sourceware.cygnus.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Message-Id:	<199908222138.QAA08957@mercury.xraylith.wisc.edu>
To:	Corinna Vinschen <corinna AT vinschen DOT de>
cc:	Emanuele Aliberti <ealiberti AT hotmail DOT com>, cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Subject:	Re: FW: Description of the new 'ntsec' feature
In-Reply-To:	Your message of "Sun, 22 Aug 1999 23:26:44 +0200."
	<37C06B14 DOT 6B06DF98 AT vinschen DOT de>
Date:	Sun, 22 Aug 1999 16:38:12 -0500
From:	Mumit Khan <khan AT xraylith DOT wisc DOT EDU>

Corinna Vinschen <corinna AT vinschen DOT de> writes:
> > Did you check how POSIX security is emulated in the Interix subsystem
> > against NT's security?

Interix is "special" since it uses its own subsystem, and has the added
advantage of running on NT only. I don't believe looking at Interix is
that productive. A more comparable implementation in this regard is AT&T 
UWIN, and it does go to some length to handle permission and so on (via 
two services on NT, and somewhat braindead on Win9x).

> No. It's a "clean room implementation". I don't want to look how it's
> solved in other systems but I want to hear discussions and opinions
> how to do our own implementation.

That's the best way, especially when it comes implementing proprietary
interfaces as well as emulating proprietary implementations.

Regards,
Mumit


--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com

- Raw text -