[comp.sys.amiga.tech] Protection bits for amigados files

ncreed@ndsuvax.UUCP (Walter Reed) (08/23/88)

Are any of the unused protection bits ever going to be used or not?
The reason why I ask, is I was thinking of writing a bunch of routines
to replace the DOS functions (Ala SetFunction) that actually check
for file accessability (using Examine()).  Of course, all my routines
would do is check, and pass through to the old functions.  Why do I
want to do this?  Well, Lets say I want to allow remote access to my
machine, but still want to have some control over what goes on.
UUX could be used safely.  Maybe I just want to protect myself from
accidently overwritting a file.  Lots of good reasons.  Now I could
just use the old bits and get away with it fine, but I want further
control.  Like the next four bits being the Superuser access bits.

Now, Lets say I replaced the DOS functions.  Programs that use the
message passing routines to access DOS will still go on unbuffered, right?
(Dos packets you know...)  This is OK since most programs don't use
these.

-- 
------  Walter Reed  ------   + uunet!ndsuvax!ncreed or ncreed@ndsuvax.BITNET
"There's no point in being    +      or ncreed@plains.NoDak.edu
 grown up if you can't be     +   
 childish sometimes!" Dr. Who + USnAIL: 925 9th Ave W.  West Fargo, ND 58078

andy@cbmvax.UUCP (Andy Finkel) (08/24/88)

In article <1153@ndsuvax.UUCP> ncreed@ndsuvax.UUCP (Walter Reed) writes:
>Are any of the unused protection bits ever going to be used or not?

Yes...the other protection bits are going to be used.

However, the upper 8 are available for user (non-system) use.

-- 
andy finkel		{uunet|rutgers|amiga}!cbmvax!andy
Commodore-Amiga, Inc.

"If we can't fix it, it ain't broke."

Any expressed opinions are mine; but feel free to share.
I disclaim all responsibilities, all shapes, all sizes, all colors.