From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 6 22:42:29 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FCCD106566B; Mon, 6 Dec 2010 22:42:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rmacklem@uoguelph.ca) Received: from esa-jnhn.mail.uoguelph.ca (esa-jnhn.mail.uoguelph.ca [131.104.91.44]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8F828FC0C; Mon, 6 Dec 2010 22:42:28 +0000 (UTC) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApwEAIb1/EyDaFvO/2dsb2JhbACDT6BfrjiQd4MFgVFzBIRfhg8 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.59,307,1288584000"; d="scan'208";a="103268682" Received: from erie.cs.uoguelph.ca (HELO zcs3.mail.uoguelph.ca) ([131.104.91.206]) by esa-jnhn-pri.mail.uoguelph.ca with ESMTP; 06 Dec 2010 17:42:27 -0500 Received: from zcs3.mail.uoguelph.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by zcs3.mail.uoguelph.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF734B3F33; Mon, 6 Dec 2010 17:42:27 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2010 17:42:27 -0500 (EST) From: Rick Macklem To: Joe Auty Message-ID: <462624062.1260806.1291675347837.JavaMail.root@erie.cs.uoguelph.ca> In-Reply-To: <4CFD6506.7090901@netmusician.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Originating-IP: [174.114.46.215] X-Mailer: Zimbra 6.0.7_GA_2476.RHEL4 (ZimbraWebClient - IE8 (Win)/6.0.7_GA_2473.RHEL4_64) Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_Part_1260805_36421406.1291675347835" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, =?utf-8?Q?Edward_Tomasz_Napiera=C5=82a?= Subject: Re: Migrating from NFSv3 to v4 - NFSv4 ACL/permission confusion X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2010 22:42:29 -0000 ------=_Part_1260805_36421406.1291675347835 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > So, if I want to just ignore the NFSv4 ACLs on account of not needing > anything beyond the POSIX ACLs, I'm free to do so without > consequence... Correct? > Well, NFSv4 won't be able to manipulate POSIX ACLs (really POSIX.1e draft which was never ratified and, as such, isn't a POSIX standard as I understand it). If you meant "beyond chmod" then I think you will be ok, but I haven't used ZFS, so?? ------=_Part_1260805_36421406.1291675347835--