From owner-freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Tue May 17 09:58:56 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 590C9B3E8B6 for ; Tue, 17 May 2016 09:58:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ben.rubson@gmail.com) Received: from mail-wm0-x233.google.com (mail-wm0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0E0BF1FCF for ; Tue, 17 May 2016 09:58:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ben.rubson@gmail.com) Received: by mail-wm0-x233.google.com with SMTP id e201so132560545wme.0 for ; Tue, 17 May 2016 02:58:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=fVFYb9DEHoOtLYb3+bXfEaJ0BkPZUk/TdYG58pqGLJk=; b=cXL7gTzqQ/z0DwE5cR8VGa/unafK8AjKW+v6Gaiqr4WNPHKkq+M1nQcTZRotnmh+G/ pk93ASZY7cF3JgoBw0FU9D8s2wwD6xod2rpkleRh6UnFGk2pQHz7YqOs2xusqKPKfn7Q zQAbANZR8yL8Kz06sI7z5qug3cjm0GQuMQXxNb53eS8Mp2cH2aMZOsuNUMMCVinm2WvM ctMcNuxG0pGL9wAN/mFaEl9lbCXLC73LX/h6CLIoLXxJWllD8Cim0kyuDyRDRqptUYf7 wXUTw/0yrAVkKv6mU8ESEFdVGG5VlgFjhz63XcRUAez8kLU0MPIHrPz00yCMn6cAP4qt ojOw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=fVFYb9DEHoOtLYb3+bXfEaJ0BkPZUk/TdYG58pqGLJk=; b=CaTHLtusM8hSlTeNufOY7rFmFFwHKwndIoi3Y3wUleXBVUnxTBLKUeWLdg7bBmhKPt P+0VSzp7IgU25k9yqEkXJUvwHC1TUm9SImpsRGRuPVGKNY7wb0HKJT41xzCXfBNiZf4d 60TxePet/z/A0sCFI7Uq0jPdt7WFtPSqlItpep92/FgdPfTb36MnMHS6BK8tbqp3PztI TjelVyL85lWnpYuNCt7aWWIhm2/ZZH+GfZDfIkXvUQ+iEXextRRpJoCFFNVdvVjUZqci bEmgdkynHyRZ0DysAymBNI6nvDWzjCvW/euf0HJG1MnOb2h88Zs/0gxmd5FHZI7XhBnB wWvQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FXUJzN2GaBVBzoLI/LVLLsFvjXpPzP+kmPDUOmLZjGRLoaJJFTejmqSyD6XP2YfYQ== X-Received: by 10.28.86.10 with SMTP id k10mr458623wmb.96.1463479134591; Tue, 17 May 2016 02:58:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.16] (210.236.26.109.rev.sfr.net. [109.26.236.210]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id jp2sm2183352wjc.16.2016.05.17.02.58.53 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 17 May 2016 02:58:53 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) Subject: Re: Bigger MAX_PATH (Was: Re: State of native encryption in ZFS) From: Ben RUBSON In-Reply-To: <9ead4b28-9711-5e38-483f-ef9eaf0bc583@digiware.nl> Date: Tue, 17 May 2016 11:58:52 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <9F057D48-5413-437B-A612-64D47E95C846@gmail.com> References: <5736E7B4.1000409@gmail.com> <57378707.19425.B54772B@s_sourceforge.nedprod.com> <57385356.4525.E728971@s_sourceforge.nedprod.com> <9ead4b28-9711-5e38-483f-ef9eaf0bc583@digiware.nl> To: "freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124) X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 May 2016 09:58:56 -0000 > On 15 may 2016 at 12:45, Niall Douglas wrote: >=20 >>> If FreeBSD had a bigger PATH_MAX then stackable encryptions layers >>> like ecryptfs (encfs?) would be viable choices. Because encrypted >>> path components are so long, one runs very rapidly into the maximum >>> path on the system when PATH_MAX is so low. Could you give us some examples where PATH_MAX was too low for you using = ecryptfs ? I (for the moment) do not run into troubles using EncFS. > http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/misc-184340-PATH-MAX-not-interope > rable-with-Linux-td5864469.html And examples where PATH_MAX is too low using Rsync ? Is it too low when we want to sync from Linux to FreeBSD ? Or from = FreeBSD to Linux ? Using Rsync over SSH ? Or using the Rsync daemon on the receiving side ? Thank you very much ! Ben