I asked this two weeks ago but didn't get any reply: Can file locking and permission setting be added to Boost.Filesystem? Elisha Berns
I doesn't have to support every operative system out
there. Can it be done to support the major operative
systems at least?
++ Hector C.
--- Elisha Berns
I asked this two weeks ago but didn't get any reply:
Can file locking and permission setting be added to Boost.Filesystem?
Elisha Berns
---------------------------------- __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Calderon Hector wrote:
I doesn't have to support every operative system out there. Can it be done to support the major operative systems at least?
Still not easily. Windows and Unix have quite different permission systems: Windows uses access control lists, which support fine-grained control of who is able to access which files. Unix uses user/group/world permissions, which are far less fine-grained, with some *nices in some configurations supporting POSIX ACLs too. (For example, this is a compile flag that must be enabled for the file systems in the Linux kernel.) Finding a common interface for even these two is therefore very difficult. I'm sure though that there would be interest in any ideas you might have. Sebastian Redl
Well even simple functionality would be very useful:
1) The ability to set read/write/delete access to the
file/directory for other processes.
2) The ability to get an OS specific handle to the
file/directory from the Boost.Filesystem lib so that
you can then manipulate file permissions yourself.
For example, a method signature like
boost::file_handle get_filehandle() where
boost::file_handle is a typedef per OS. But that
would totally break encapsulation for all the iostream
libraries, right?
Elisha
--- Sebastian Redl
Calderon Hector wrote:
I doesn't have to support every operative system out there. Can it be done to support the major operative systems at least?
Still not easily. Windows and Unix have quite different permission systems: Windows uses access control lists, which support fine-grained control of who is able to access which files. Unix uses user/group/world permissions, which are far less fine-grained, with some *nices in some configurations supporting POSIX ACLs too. (For example, this is a compile flag that must be enabled for the file systems in the Linux kernel.)
Finding a common interface for even these two is therefore very difficult. I'm sure though that there would be interest in any ideas you might have.
Sebastian Redl _______________________________________________ Boost-users mailing list Boost-users@lists.boost.org
It seems to me that you just implied the answer. The
control access would be class whose constructor takes
a path. It would throw if the path doesn't resolve to
an existent file or directory. The class would have
some getter functions that tell you the state of the
file/directory, and some setter functions that _try_
to set the permissions for the file/directory. If they
cannot change the access controls, because the
granularity is wrong, or the process has not enough
priviledges, or just because, then they would fail
silently leaving the burden of checking that the
access has been effectively changed to the user. The
user would check by using the getter functions.
This way, operative systems with less habilities do
not hamper the development in those more capable
systems.
Again, the key is that the setter functions should
only attempt the changes.
++Hector C.
--- Sebastian Redl
Calderon Hector wrote:
I doesn't have to support every operative system out there. Can it be done to support the major operative systems at least?
Still not easily. Windows and Unix have quite different permission systems: Windows uses access control lists, which support fine-grained control of who is able to access which files. Unix uses user/group/world permissions, which are far less fine-grained, with some *nices in some configurations supporting POSIX ACLs too. (For example, this is a compile flag that must be enabled for the file systems in the Linux kernel.)
Finding a common interface for even these two is therefore very difficult. I'm sure though that there would be interest in any ideas you might have.
Sebastian Redl _______________________________________________ Boost-users mailing list Boost-users@lists.boost.org
http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users
---------------------------------- __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
participants (3)
-
Calderon Hector -
Elisha Berns -
Sebastian Redl