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