Re: ANN: NTFS 2.0.1 for kernel 2.5.7 released

[Mike Fedyk]

On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 12:57:07PM +0000, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Mar 2002, Padraig Brady wrote:
> > Is this a good default?
> 
> I don't see what's wrong with that. It follows the logic of least
> surprise. In Windows all files are executable as there is no way to
> distinguish executables from non-executables due to lack of executable
> bit. NTFS on Linux has no way of telling the difference either and hence
> it makes sense to allow execution of all files.

The difference with NTFS is that there is a possibility to have unix permissions
working with it natively, with no extra visible files like with umsdos.

What are you going to do when unix permissions/ACLs are supported in Linux
NTFS?  Default back to non executable?

How much extra work would it be to map the unix executable bits to a NTFS acl?