ownership of devices

[Charles Lopes]

Bill Nottingham wrote:

>Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams (ivazquez at ivazquez.net) said: 
>  
>
>>>The only problem is that apparently it is hard for an rpm to add a group
>>>when a system is being upgraded between distros; ie, while anaconda
>>>could add this new group just fine, people doing a dist upgrade, it is
>>>claimed, will not get this group installed.
>>>      
>>>
>>I seem to recall a long-winded discussion about the fedora-usermgmt
>>package. Perhaps it's time to move it into Core and make it responsible
>>for creating the groups if needed.
>>    
>>
>
>Dynamically modified groups + setgid programs are a poor solution for
>device access.
>
>Runtime ACLs done via HAL is probably a better solution - I remember
>Colin having some ideas in this area.
>
>Bill
>
>  
>
Do you mean using the extended POSIX ACLs instead of just the base ACLs 
(traditional unix perms). Otherwise there would be limitations in 
sharing a device between users. Should /dev be always in a filesystem 
mounted with acl support? Some people might use tmpfs or ramfs for /dev. 
Do they support ACLs? What about devpts or capifs?
All in all, I would love to see ACLs used in /dev. That could solve some 
other minor problems like the ownership of /dev/tty* when doing a "su" 
from root for example.

Charles