From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 3 11:06:49 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9C10106564A for ; Mon, 3 Nov 2008 11:06:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from owner-bugmaster@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DED28FC1A for ; Mon, 3 Nov 2008 11:06:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from owner-bugmaster@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id mA3B6ntA010837 for ; Mon, 3 Nov 2008 11:06:49 GMT (envelope-from owner-bugmaster@FreeBSD.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id mA3B6mwv010833 for freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org; Mon, 3 Nov 2008 11:06:48 GMT (envelope-from owner-bugmaster@FreeBSD.org) Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2008 11:06:48 GMT Message-Id: <200811031106.mA3B6mwv010833@freefall.freebsd.org> X-Authentication-Warning: freefall.freebsd.org: gnats set sender to owner-bugmaster@FreeBSD.org using -f From: FreeBSD bugmaster To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org Cc: Subject: Current problem reports assigned to freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2008 11:06:49 -0000 Note: to view an individual PR, use: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=(number). The following is a listing of current problems submitted by FreeBSD users. These represent problem reports covering all versions including experimental development code and obsolete releases. S Tracker Resp. Description -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- o kern/120749 arch [request] Suggest upping the default kern.ps_arg_cache 1 problem total. From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Nov 6 19:25:40 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81E21106568F for ; Thu, 6 Nov 2008 19:25:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from trasz@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from pin.if.uz.zgora.pl (pin.if.uz.zgora.pl [212.109.128.251]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 486DB8FC08 for ; Thu, 6 Nov 2008 19:25:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from trasz@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: by pin.if.uz.zgora.pl (Postfix, from userid 1001) id E60B039BCB; Thu, 6 Nov 2008 20:28:29 +0100 (CET) Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2008 20:28:29 +0100 From: Edward Tomasz Napierala To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Message-ID: <20081106192829.GA98742@pin.if.uz.zgora.pl> References: <20081027193545.GA95872@pin.if.uz.zgora.pl> <20081028161855.GA45129@zim.MIT.EDU> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20081028161855.GA45129@zim.MIT.EDU> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Cc: Subject: Re: Directory rename semantics. X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2008 19:25:40 -0000 After discussion about this with rwatson and pjd, I decided to do the opposite: change ZFS behaviour to match UFS. Reason is simple: this is security, and we want to be conservative here. It's impossible to make sure this change wouldn't cause security problems. -- If you cut off my head, what would I say? Me and my head, or me and my body? From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Nov 6 21:20:44 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76B801065678 for ; Thu, 6 Nov 2008 21:20:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ceri@submonkey.net) Received: from scuttle.submonkey.net (scuttle.submonkey.net [208.111.43.184]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C0128FC31 for ; Thu, 6 Nov 2008 21:20:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ceri@submonkey.net) Received: from cpc1-cdif1-0-0-cust63.cdif.cable.ntl.com ([81.104.164.64] helo=shrike.submonkey.net) by scuttle.submonkey.net with esmtpsa (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1KyAxU-0000TK-UL; Thu, 06 Nov 2008 19:56:01 +0000 Received: from ceri by shrike.submonkey.net with local (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1KyAxS-0008Qv-I6; Thu, 06 Nov 2008 19:55:58 +0000 Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2008 19:55:58 +0000 From: Ceri Davies To: Edward Tomasz Napierala Message-ID: <20081106195558.GG2281@submonkey.net> References: <20081027193545.GA95872@pin.if.uz.zgora.pl> <20081028161855.GA45129@zim.MIT.EDU> <20081106192829.GA98742@pin.if.uz.zgora.pl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="KFztAG8eRSV9hGtP" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20081106192829.GA98742@pin.if.uz.zgora.pl> X-PGP: finger ceri@FreeBSD.org User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: Ceri Davies Cc: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Directory rename semantics. X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2008 21:20:44 -0000 --KFztAG8eRSV9hGtP Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Nov 06, 2008 at 08:28:29PM +0100, Edward Tomasz Napierala wrote: > After discussion about this with rwatson and pjd, I decided to do > the opposite: change ZFS behaviour to match UFS. Reason is simple: > this is security, and we want to be conservative here. It's impossible > to make sure this change wouldn't cause security problems. Perhaps it would have been better to either do nothing or create a zfs property that toggled this behaviour so that people who expect ZFS to behave a certain way get it. I'm not sure why we would want all filesystems to behave the same way, to be honest. Ceri --=20 That must be wonderful! I don't understand it at all. -- Moliere --KFztAG8eRSV9hGtP Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFJE0vOocfcwTS3JF8RAujaAJ9lAZEeWe2enMySc2P+BhubPmhhkQCguysj wXnwtJ4+QPUFMSQf+yxRcEE= =leXE -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --KFztAG8eRSV9hGtP-- From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Nov 7 11:05:08 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41D7C106564A for ; Fri, 7 Nov 2008 11:05:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-arch@m.gmane.org) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B78B88FC0C for ; Fri, 7 Nov 2008 11:05:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-arch@m.gmane.org) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1KyOqa-0001fW-P1 for freebsd-arch@freebsd.org; Fri, 07 Nov 2008 10:45:49 +0000 Received: from lara.cc.fer.hr ([161.53.72.113]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 07 Nov 2008 10:45:48 +0000 Received: from ivoras by lara.cc.fer.hr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 07 Nov 2008 10:45:48 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org From: Ivan Voras Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2008 11:44:27 +0100 Lines: 44 Message-ID: References: <20081027193545.GA95872@pin.if.uz.zgora.pl> <20081028161855.GA45129@zim.MIT.EDU> <20081106192829.GA98742@pin.if.uz.zgora.pl> <20081106195558.GG2281@submonkey.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig29C47C12AA531272E280C275" X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: lara.cc.fer.hr User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (X11/20080925) In-Reply-To: <20081106195558.GG2281@submonkey.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.0 Sender: news Subject: Re: Directory rename semantics. X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2008 11:05:08 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig29C47C12AA531272E280C275 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ceri Davies wrote: > On Thu, Nov 06, 2008 at 08:28:29PM +0100, Edward Tomasz Napierala wrote= : >> After discussion about this with rwatson and pjd, I decided to do >> the opposite: change ZFS behaviour to match UFS. Reason is simple: >> this is security, and we want to be conservative here. It's impossibl= e >> to make sure this change wouldn't cause security problems. >=20 > Perhaps it would have been better to either do nothing or create a zfs > property that toggled this behaviour so that people who expect ZFS to > behave a certain way get it. I'm not sure why we would want all > filesystems to behave the same way, to be honest. That would be desirable if we want file system semantics to be a property of the OS instead of individual file systems. (Though I don't know if there's ever been a conscious decision about this particular goal). If so, a knob that toggles between the behaviours should toggle it for all file systems. Having them behave differently can create problems in migration to and from ZFS. --------------enig29C47C12AA531272E280C275 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFJFBxXldnAQVacBcgRApmAAJ9BiNfkOqtTLi7QvKpkOlqnRAjK6ACghKZH H3O7sJEjfNmLY5xFLypdY7s= =JlPJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig29C47C12AA531272E280C275-- From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Nov 7 11:10:25 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F0541065677; Fri, 7 Nov 2008 11:10:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ceri@submonkey.net) Received: from scuttle.submonkey.net (scuttle.submonkey.net [208.111.43.184]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33F9E8FC1D; Fri, 7 Nov 2008 11:10:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ceri@submonkey.net) Received: from cpc1-cdif1-0-0-cust63.cdif.cable.ntl.com ([81.104.164.64] helo=shrike.submonkey.net) by scuttle.submonkey.net with esmtpsa (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1KyPEO-0004Mi-PQ; Fri, 07 Nov 2008 11:10:24 +0000 Received: from ceri by shrike.submonkey.net with local (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1KyPEM-000Flg-OR; Fri, 07 Nov 2008 11:10:22 +0000 Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 11:10:22 +0000 From: Ceri Davies To: Edward Tomasz Napierala Message-ID: <20081107111022.GB34757@submonkey.net> References: <20081027193545.GA95872@pin.if.uz.zgora.pl> <20081028161855.GA45129@zim.MIT.EDU> <20081106192829.GA98742@pin.if.uz.zgora.pl> <20081106195558.GG2281@submonkey.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="neYutvxvOLaeuPCA" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20081106195558.GG2281@submonkey.net> X-PGP: finger ceri@FreeBSD.org User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: Ceri Davies Cc: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Directory rename semantics. X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2008 11:10:25 -0000 --neYutvxvOLaeuPCA Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Nov 06, 2008 at 07:55:58PM +0000, Ceri Davies wrote: > On Thu, Nov 06, 2008 at 08:28:29PM +0100, Edward Tomasz Napierala wrote: > > After discussion about this with rwatson and pjd, I decided to do > > the opposite: change ZFS behaviour to match UFS. Reason is simple: > > this is security, and we want to be conservative here. It's impossible > > to make sure this change wouldn't cause security problems. >=20 > Perhaps it would have been better to either do nothing or create a zfs > property that toggled this behaviour so that people who expect ZFS to > behave a certain way get it. I'm not sure why we would want all > filesystems to behave the same way, to be honest. I'm essentially unhappy here that a change to UFS which is local to us was considered important enough to ask -arch about, while ZFS which exists on at least two other operating systems was deemed fine to go ahead and change without review. Ceri --=20 That must be wonderful! I don't understand it at all. -- Moliere --neYutvxvOLaeuPCA Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (FreeBSD) iD4DBQFJFCIeocfcwTS3JF8RAgHLAJwKIP7ffaEwuCquU8w9vaA5erbRNQCY6dio Kcmqqxq5bEzjvbldwjx2LA== =ZwCD -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --neYutvxvOLaeuPCA-- From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Nov 7 11:50:27 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5105A106567B for ; Fri, 7 Nov 2008 11:50:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-arch@m.gmane.org) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9AB78FC2A for ; Fri, 7 Nov 2008 11:50:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-arch@m.gmane.org) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1KyPr2-000493-Et for freebsd-arch@freebsd.org; Fri, 07 Nov 2008 11:50:20 +0000 Received: from lara.cc.fer.hr ([161.53.72.113]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 07 Nov 2008 11:50:20 +0000 Received: from ivoras by lara.cc.fer.hr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 07 Nov 2008 11:50:20 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org From: Ivan Voras Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2008 12:50:16 +0100 Lines: 45 Message-ID: References: <20081027193545.GA95872@pin.if.uz.zgora.pl> <20081028161855.GA45129@zim.MIT.EDU> <20081106192829.GA98742@pin.if.uz.zgora.pl> <20081106195558.GG2281@submonkey.net> <20081107111022.GB34757@submonkey.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enigDCBB5AAF808155F6A263C59B" X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: lara.cc.fer.hr User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (X11/20080925) In-Reply-To: <20081107111022.GB34757@submonkey.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.0 Sender: news Subject: Re: Directory rename semantics. X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2008 11:50:27 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enigDCBB5AAF808155F6A263C59B Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ceri Davies wrote: > On Thu, Nov 06, 2008 at 07:55:58PM +0000, Ceri Davies wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 06, 2008 at 08:28:29PM +0100, Edward Tomasz Napierala wrot= e: >>> After discussion about this with rwatson and pjd, I decided to do >>> the opposite: change ZFS behaviour to match UFS. Reason is simple: >>> this is security, and we want to be conservative here. It's impossib= le >>> to make sure this change wouldn't cause security problems. >> Perhaps it would have been better to either do nothing or create a zfs= >> property that toggled this behaviour so that people who expect ZFS to >> behave a certain way get it. I'm not sure why we would want all >> filesystems to behave the same way, to be honest. >=20 > I'm essentially unhappy here that a change to UFS which is local to us > was considered important enough to ask -arch about, while ZFS which > exists on at least two other operating systems was deemed fine to go > ahead and change without review. I think it has something to do with the percentage of "our" users running UFS vs ZFS :) --------------enigDCBB5AAF808155F6A263C59B Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFJFCt4ldnAQVacBcgRAqPxAJ9zjc49buG3Iv2Toy5AleuE1rirDQCg8LR6 pDji0HVqc14vlDQP2f3UF8c= =UkyC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enigDCBB5AAF808155F6A263C59B-- From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Nov 7 12:33:03 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1169D1065689 for ; Fri, 7 Nov 2008 12:33:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ceri@submonkey.net) Received: from scuttle.submonkey.net (scuttle.submonkey.net [208.111.43.184]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9E1A8FC19 for ; Fri, 7 Nov 2008 12:33:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ceri@submonkey.net) Received: from cpc1-cdif1-0-0-cust63.cdif.cable.ntl.com ([81.104.164.64] helo=shrike.submonkey.net) by scuttle.submonkey.net with esmtpsa (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1KyQWM-0005nV-4T; Fri, 07 Nov 2008 12:33:02 +0000 Received: from ceri by shrike.submonkey.net with local (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1KyQWK-000EPo-1H; Fri, 07 Nov 2008 12:33:00 +0000 Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 12:32:59 +0000 From: Ceri Davies To: Ivan Voras Message-ID: <20081107123259.GC34757@submonkey.net> References: <20081027193545.GA95872@pin.if.uz.zgora.pl> <20081028161855.GA45129@zim.MIT.EDU> <20081106192829.GA98742@pin.if.uz.zgora.pl> <20081106195558.GG2281@submonkey.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="/e2eDi0V/xtL+Mc8" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-PGP: finger ceri@FreeBSD.org User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: Ceri Davies Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Directory rename semantics. X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2008 12:33:03 -0000 --/e2eDi0V/xtL+Mc8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Nov 07, 2008 at 11:44:27AM +0100, Ivan Voras wrote: > Ceri Davies wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 06, 2008 at 08:28:29PM +0100, Edward Tomasz Napierala wrote: > >> After discussion about this with rwatson and pjd, I decided to do > >> the opposite: change ZFS behaviour to match UFS. Reason is simple: > >> this is security, and we want to be conservative here. It's impossible > >> to make sure this change wouldn't cause security problems. > >=20 > > Perhaps it would have been better to either do nothing or create a zfs > > property that toggled this behaviour so that people who expect ZFS to > > behave a certain way get it. I'm not sure why we would want all > > filesystems to behave the same way, to be honest. >=20 > That would be desirable if we want file system semantics to be a > property of the OS instead of individual file systems. (Though I don't > know if there's ever been a conscious decision about this particular > goal). If so, a knob that toggles between the behaviours should toggle > it for all file systems. Having them behave differently can create > problems in migration to and from ZFS. That's essentially what has just happened, but without the knob. I'm not really sure whether you agree with the change that was made or not. Ceri --=20 That must be wonderful! I don't understand it at all. -- Moliere --/e2eDi0V/xtL+Mc8 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFJFDV7ocfcwTS3JF8RArXoAKCw0tLcK3j0CpT8KS2+aSN7wWi/pQCgv1Ki QcW9OUkLnAN8XyY6i2vy26A= =AmiG -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --/e2eDi0V/xtL+Mc8-- From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Nov 7 14:37:36 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44F84106568C for ; Fri, 7 Nov 2008 14:37:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-arch@m.gmane.org) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCEEA8FC14 for ; Fri, 7 Nov 2008 14:37:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-arch@m.gmane.org) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1KySSn-0002Q9-Mu for freebsd-arch@freebsd.org; Fri, 07 Nov 2008 14:37:29 +0000 Received: from lara.cc.fer.hr ([161.53.72.113]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 07 Nov 2008 14:37:29 +0000 Received: from ivoras by lara.cc.fer.hr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 07 Nov 2008 14:37:29 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org From: Ivan Voras Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2008 15:37:18 +0100 Lines: 56 Message-ID: References: <20081027193545.GA95872@pin.if.uz.zgora.pl> <20081028161855.GA45129@zim.MIT.EDU> <20081106192829.GA98742@pin.if.uz.zgora.pl> <20081106195558.GG2281@submonkey.net> <20081107123259.GC34757@submonkey.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enigED0D2EDD547B049C2EE41C14" X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: lara.cc.fer.hr User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (X11/20080925) In-Reply-To: <20081107123259.GC34757@submonkey.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.0 Sender: news Subject: Re: Directory rename semantics. X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2008 14:37:36 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enigED0D2EDD547B049C2EE41C14 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ceri Davies wrote: > On Fri, Nov 07, 2008 at 11:44:27AM +0100, Ivan Voras wrote: >> Ceri Davies wrote: >>> On Thu, Nov 06, 2008 at 08:28:29PM +0100, Edward Tomasz Napierala wro= te: >>>> After discussion about this with rwatson and pjd, I decided to do >>>> the opposite: change ZFS behaviour to match UFS. Reason is simple: >>>> this is security, and we want to be conservative here. It's impossi= ble >>>> to make sure this change wouldn't cause security problems. >>> Perhaps it would have been better to either do nothing or create a zf= s >>> property that toggled this behaviour so that people who expect ZFS to= >>> behave a certain way get it. I'm not sure why we would want all >>> filesystems to behave the same way, to be honest. >> That would be desirable if we want file system semantics to be a >> property of the OS instead of individual file systems. (Though I don't= >> know if there's ever been a conscious decision about this particular >> goal). If so, a knob that toggles between the behaviours should toggle= >> it for all file systems. Having them behave differently can create >> problems in migration to and from ZFS. >=20 > That's essentially what has just happened, but without the knob. >=20 > I'm not really sure whether you agree with the change that was made or > not. I agree with the aspect of the change that unified the semantics on UFS and ZFS. I hope somebody comes up with a knob that would toggle it for both systems at the same time, if the alternate behaviour is useful to people. --------------enigED0D2EDD547B049C2EE41C14 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFJFFKeldnAQVacBcgRAjf8AKDZVg5HvQR9ahY54shV+GHJ2oTfLACeKa6H hF5WzvySx+vxDEcxvCsbkaw= =uiOo -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enigED0D2EDD547B049C2EE41C14-- From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Nov 7 15:02:50 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29DF01065672 for ; Fri, 7 Nov 2008 15:02:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from trasz@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from pin.if.uz.zgora.pl (pin.if.uz.zgora.pl [212.109.128.251]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E30F58FC21 for ; Fri, 7 Nov 2008 15:02:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from trasz@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: by pin.if.uz.zgora.pl (Postfix, from userid 1001) id D04BF39BC9; Fri, 7 Nov 2008 16:05:44 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 16:05:44 +0100 From: Edward Tomasz Napierala To: Ceri Davies Message-ID: <20081107150544.GA12290@pin.if.uz.zgora.pl> References: <20081027193545.GA95872@pin.if.uz.zgora.pl> <20081028161855.GA45129@zim.MIT.EDU> <20081106192829.GA98742@pin.if.uz.zgora.pl> <20081106195558.GG2281@submonkey.net> <20081107111022.GB34757@submonkey.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20081107111022.GB34757@submonkey.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Cc: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Directory rename semantics. X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2008 15:02:50 -0000 On 1107T1110, Ceri Davies wrote: > > > After discussion about this with rwatson and pjd, I decided to do > > > the opposite: change ZFS behaviour to match UFS. Reason is simple: > > > this is security, and we want to be conservative here. It's impossible > > > to make sure this change wouldn't cause security problems. > > > > Perhaps it would have been better to either do nothing or create a zfs > > property that toggled this behaviour so that people who expect ZFS to > > behave a certain way get it. I'm not sure why we would want all > > filesystems to behave the same way, to be honest. Because of consistency. Having different access rights behaviour in different filesystems under the same operating system is confusing. > I'm essentially unhappy here that a change to UFS which is local to us > was considered important enough to ask -arch about, while ZFS which > exists on at least two other operating systems was deemed fine to go > ahead and change without review. The change to UFS changes behaviour that 'was always there'. Also, it changes the behaviour to more permissive. On the other hand, change to ZFS is just another fix to make its semantics match ours. Not the first one - our ZFS behaves differently from ZFS under SunOS in other places, e.g. newly created files inherit their group from the parent directory. Also, the change makes it more restrictive. Sure, I can make it controllable via sysctl or a property. However, that would increase complexity - and the risk of security problems - even more, for a very little in return (how many people actually _know_ about this check?). Also, it _was_ reviewed. Just not here. ;-) -- If you cut off my head, what would I say? Me and my head, or me and my body? From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Nov 7 16:34:28 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3AB1106567F for ; Fri, 7 Nov 2008 16:34:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from das@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from zim.MIT.EDU (ZIM.MIT.EDU [18.95.3.101]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9493B8FC27 for ; Fri, 7 Nov 2008 16:34:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from das@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from zim.MIT.EDU (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zim.MIT.EDU (8.14.3/8.14.2) with ESMTP id mA7GdAWa007058; Fri, 7 Nov 2008 11:39:10 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from das@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: (from das@localhost) by zim.MIT.EDU (8.14.3/8.14.2/Submit) id mA7GdAEW007057; Fri, 7 Nov 2008 11:39:10 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from das@FreeBSD.ORG) Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 11:39:10 -0500 From: David Schultz To: Ivan Voras Message-ID: <20081107163910.GA7007@zim.MIT.EDU> Mail-Followup-To: Ivan Voras , freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG References: <20081027193545.GA95872@pin.if.uz.zgora.pl> <20081028161855.GA45129@zim.MIT.EDU> <20081106192829.GA98742@pin.if.uz.zgora.pl> <20081106195558.GG2281@submonkey.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Cc: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Directory rename semantics. X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2008 16:34:28 -0000 On Fri, Nov 07, 2008, Ivan Voras wrote: > That would be desirable if we want file system semantics to be a > property of the OS instead of individual file systems. (Though I don't > know if there's ever been a conscious decision about this particular > goal). I don't agree with this. The access control rules are fundamentally a property of the filesystem. Nobody expects msdosfs or ntfs to have the same semantics as UFS, for instance. Furthermore, even if you hacked up all the local filesystems to support the "FreeBSD rules" (as a recent commit seems to have done), you'd still get different semantics for remote NFS and AFS mounts. From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Nov 7 18:34:54 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9975F1065670 for ; Fri, 7 Nov 2008 18:34:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ivoras@gmail.com) Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com (fg-out-1718.google.com [72.14.220.157]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 241718FC1B for ; Fri, 7 Nov 2008 18:34:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ivoras@gmail.com) Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id l26so1054600fgb.35 for ; Fri, 07 Nov 2008 10:34:52 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender :to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references :x-google-sender-auth; bh=xxZTudatHkhjspul45eF7sQ7az+DTH0F6q3GfePNaBw=; b=iKwi7P364tn8pzfXvUfLRDjxfy+YGcVCrsgxLsaNpMfT4g608VEzsl3rjMBWCIr/Wo qVg8o0np420XQwMGu5dXNe9o1eID7CGhFBRzSAtvcADl0rjJiMOGq34hgpnF4V3MNtFq rRGk+wzb4XJoymMIFkNl0ZnoIfF03EiVpYwVM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references:x-google-sender-auth; b=NvvVdWSrYV2VdSRsYbYj5pEtRyiEQ8iOnvwR5f+XJjaeIK68NfwHn4cf2A3ArP8rDB CIwThAI9WSishPbNAwbyaHtSl4JKfxCvQwGibWYdE6E1vpNEh9EdLRXDI8ZEjTPPz3Fv 4o6g6GEXHym18C7UmLMVbfX2R+VpgtfbbeuEk= Received: by 10.181.61.18 with SMTP id o18mr1139532bkk.24.1226081614435; Fri, 07 Nov 2008 10:13:34 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.181.225.15 with HTTP; Fri, 7 Nov 2008 10:13:34 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <9bbcef730811071013q35c04dd4gb582a286a709f22d@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 19:13:34 +0100 From: "Ivan Voras" Sender: ivoras@gmail.com To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <20081107163910.GA7007@zim.MIT.EDU> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20081027193545.GA95872@pin.if.uz.zgora.pl> <20081028161855.GA45129@zim.MIT.EDU> <20081106192829.GA98742@pin.if.uz.zgora.pl> <20081106195558.GG2281@submonkey.net> <20081107163910.GA7007@zim.MIT.EDU> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 97c02423eb612413 Subject: Re: Directory rename semantics. X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2008 18:34:54 -0000 2008/11/7 David Schultz : > On Fri, Nov 07, 2008, Ivan Voras wrote: >> That would be desirable if we want file system semantics to be a >> property of the OS instead of individual file systems. (Though I don't >> know if there's ever been a conscious decision about this particular >> goal). > > I don't agree with this. The access control rules are > fundamentally a property of the filesystem. Nobody expects msdosfs > or ntfs to have the same semantics as UFS, for instance. > Furthermore, even if you hacked up all the local filesystems to > support the "FreeBSD rules" (as a recent commit seems to have > done), you'd still get different semantics for remote NFS and AFS > mounts. There's a fundamental difference between the three groups of file systems: UFS and ZFS are native local file systems created for Unix, MSDOSfs is definitely an odd, foreign file system, while NFS and AFS are network file systems nobody trusts anyway :) From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Nov 7 21:12:31 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 604CE1065677; Fri, 7 Nov 2008 21:12:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ceri@submonkey.net) Received: from scuttle.submonkey.net (scuttle.submonkey.net [208.111.43.184]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41DDB8FC1B; Fri, 7 Nov 2008 21:12:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ceri@submonkey.net) Received: from cpc1-cdif1-0-0-cust63.cdif.cable.ntl.com ([81.104.164.64] helo=shrike.submonkey.net) by scuttle.submonkey.net with esmtpsa (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1KyYd4-00000q-MB; Fri, 07 Nov 2008 21:12:30 +0000 Received: from ceri by shrike.submonkey.net with local (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1KyYd2-000DCT-H1; Fri, 07 Nov 2008 21:12:28 +0000 Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 21:12:28 +0000 From: Ceri Davies To: Ivan Voras Message-ID: <20081107211228.GF34757@submonkey.net> References: <20081027193545.GA95872@pin.if.uz.zgora.pl> <20081028161855.GA45129@zim.MIT.EDU> <20081106192829.GA98742@pin.if.uz.zgora.pl> <20081106195558.GG2281@submonkey.net> <20081107163910.GA7007@zim.MIT.EDU> <9bbcef730811071013q35c04dd4gb582a286a709f22d@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="xkXJwpr35CY/Lc3I" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9bbcef730811071013q35c04dd4gb582a286a709f22d@mail.gmail.com> X-PGP: finger ceri@FreeBSD.org User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: Ceri Davies Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Directory rename semantics. X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2008 21:12:31 -0000 --xkXJwpr35CY/Lc3I Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Nov 07, 2008 at 07:13:34PM +0100, Ivan Voras wrote: > 2008/11/7 David Schultz : > > On Fri, Nov 07, 2008, Ivan Voras wrote: > >> That would be desirable if we want file system semantics to be a > >> property of the OS instead of individual file systems. (Though I don't > >> know if there's ever been a conscious decision about this particular > >> goal). > > > > I don't agree with this. The access control rules are > > fundamentally a property of the filesystem. Nobody expects msdosfs > > or ntfs to have the same semantics as UFS, for instance. > > Furthermore, even if you hacked up all the local filesystems to > > support the "FreeBSD rules" (as a recent commit seems to have > > done), you'd still get different semantics for remote NFS and AFS > > mounts. >=20 > There's a fundamental difference between the three groups of file > systems: UFS and ZFS are native local file systems created for Unix, > MSDOSfs is definitely an odd, foreign file system, while NFS and AFS > are network file systems nobody trusts anyway :) The point is that if you are concerned about these things then you should be checking what file system you are using anyway, and therefore there is no point in changing ZFS to match UFS. ZFS ACLs are completely disparate to UFS ones, for example, so what's the proposal to fix that difference? Ceri --=20 That must be wonderful! I don't understand it at all. -- Moliere --xkXJwpr35CY/Lc3I Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFJFK88ocfcwTS3JF8RAjHlAKCNA99Q1Bm0/nlXRDtTOdkYCQD9awCfehMT HOuLmOqR3yzaCNfISG7XILs= =LVsM -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --xkXJwpr35CY/Lc3I-- From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Nov 7 21:27:05 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CC131065673 for ; Fri, 7 Nov 2008 21:27:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ivoras@gmail.com) Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com (fg-out-1718.google.com [72.14.220.154]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9FC68FC12 for ; Fri, 7 Nov 2008 21:27:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ivoras@gmail.com) Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id l26so1121030fgb.35 for ; Fri, 07 Nov 2008 13:27:02 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender :to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references :x-google-sender-auth; bh=qx2DbmHcbkANBgnWkDwQJmoDD99r985LUg2bHz8GXvg=; b=f/XrAx+tSaEDTwRqx2TtQ2yP4K0uHCSAhtcMwptdaUQoCoqVnyzoXYhkKag1XbCxxA +vqFO5dzxTuIQMei6RhiRtEdHuk0xS2c4XMhI4MZBPphFFRjaJ1dIsthTm+ogb6l7yNm YFYiRANYPNq5i2eEdeeSm5lAfRtpFYa756bQg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references:x-google-sender-auth; b=s5SrD+83mUdIkXKz3no0363owuEY4wLfOViEMnYt+/JUo/4ld6wjltt7eYrityb8z3 mbsjmSghf2sthuMWKN2GIwJ1k216i3epHcQiiHWpScQAy69IT/2zd1+AyFTjcl0miREg 6ZGxYPF3RSyr0H1mgNNJgBPfTT1vR831AP4ow= Received: by 10.181.239.8 with SMTP id q8mr1185217bkr.109.1226093222771; Fri, 07 Nov 2008 13:27:02 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.181.225.15 with HTTP; Fri, 7 Nov 2008 13:27:02 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <9bbcef730811071327y494401eflfe7c7bcd64316a62@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 22:27:02 +0100 From: "Ivan Voras" Sender: ivoras@gmail.com To: "Ceri Davies" In-Reply-To: <20081107211228.GF34757@submonkey.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20081027193545.GA95872@pin.if.uz.zgora.pl> <20081028161855.GA45129@zim.MIT.EDU> <20081106192829.GA98742@pin.if.uz.zgora.pl> <20081106195558.GG2281@submonkey.net> <20081107163910.GA7007@zim.MIT.EDU> <9bbcef730811071013q35c04dd4gb582a286a709f22d@mail.gmail.com> <20081107211228.GF34757@submonkey.net> X-Google-Sender-Auth: d3a0142a3a5912dd Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Directory rename semantics. X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2008 21:27:05 -0000 2008/11/7 Ceri Davies : > The point is that if you are concerned about these things then you > should be checking what file system you are using anyway, and therefore I agree - users should test before using, but... > there is no point in changing ZFS to match UFS. In an ideal world, I would like just the thing - obviously, within limits (things like ZFS snapshots and such are what makes ZFS - ZFS). A good goal would be to make file systems indistinguishable to non-administrative userland applications running on them. > ZFS ACLs are completely > disparate to UFS ones, for example, so what's the proposal to fix that > difference? Erm, exactly the thing that's supposed to be done, as described at: http://wiki.freebsd.org/ZFS :) "Currently ZFS on FreeBSD doesn't support ACLs. ZFS itself supports NFSv4-style ACLs, which is different than the existing POSIX.1e implementation in FreeBSD, which means that first thing to do is to add support for NFSv4-style ACLs to FreeBSD, which is being done as a GSoC project." I'm not going to argue this point just for the sake of arguing - I don't think I will convince you and I believe in my standpoint. Since I'm not able to work on either file system, I'll leave it to the people who will to decide :)