From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Aug 20 12:27:17 2012
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG>
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 CEFFA106566C;
	Mon, 20 Aug 2012 12:27:17 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from pavel.priv@hte.vl.net.ua)
Received: from relay.hte.vl.net.ua (relay.hte.vl.net.ua [81.17.132.178])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80EA48FC0A;
	Mon, 20 Aug 2012 12:27:17 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from filter (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by relay.hte.vl.net.ua (Postfix) with ESMTP id 423E01713580;
	Mon, 20 Aug 2012 15:27:16 +0300 (EEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at hte.vl.net.ua
Received: from relay.hte.vl.net.ua ([127.0.0.1])
	by filter (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP
	id eHXZ_7YaZ37n; Mon, 20 Aug 2012 15:27:15 +0300 (EEST)
Received: from [192.168.0.200] (unknown [192.168.0.200])
	by relay.hte.vl.net.ua (Postfix) with ESMTPA id AE14C1711FE3;
	Mon, 20 Aug 2012 15:27:15 +0300 (EEST)
Message-ID: <50322CF8.8000105@hte.vl.net.ua>
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 15:26:32 +0300
From: =?UTF-8?B?0J/QsNCy0LXQuw==?= <pavel.priv@hte.vl.net.ua>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1;
	rv:14.0) Gecko/20120713 Thunderbird/14.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: =?UTF-8?B?RWR3YXJkIFRvbWFzeiBOYXBpZXJhxYJh?= <trasz@FreeBSD.org>
References: <502FD583.9070105@hte.vl.net.ua>
	<06453437-D034-41C2-8B7F-15B228AD2532@FreeBSD.org>
	<503128BB.6040801@hte.vl.net.ua>
	<788B90E6-B36B-40D3-8C89-BD1A2902D4D5@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <788B90E6-B36B-40D3-8C89-BD1A2902D4D5@FreeBSD.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Some of ZFS ACLs doesn't work as expected
X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: pavel.priv@hte.vl.net.ua
List-Id: Filesystems <freebsd-fs.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs>,
	<mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-fs>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs>,
	<mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 12:27:17 -0000


20.08.2012 14:53, Edward Tomasz Napierała пишет:
> Wiadomość napisana przez Pavel Bychykhin w dniu 19 sie 2012, o godz. 19:56:
>> 19.08.2012 19:40, Edward Tomasz Napierała пишет:
>>> Wiadomość napisana przez Pavel Bychykhin w dniu 18 sie 2012, o godz. 19:48:
>>>> Dear community!
>>>>
>>>> After my experiments with ZFS, I concluded, that permissions "delete_child" and "delete" are ignored.
>>>> For the create/update/delete operation a list of "rwxp" (read_data/write_data/execute/append_data) is fully sufficient.
>>> They are not ignored, but yes, write access on a directory is enough to delete a file.
>>>
>>>> No need to specify the "delete_child" and "delete" permissions at all, or I don't understand something?
>>> Unless you need them - no, you don't.  That's why these bits are not set in a default
>>> case (so called 'trivial ACL', i.e. no ACL set on a file).
>>>
>> Could you please provide an example of at least one practical situation, where the "delete_child" and "delete" permissions would be useful?
> You could allow for file creation, but deny file removal.  Still, as someone
> already mentioned, main reason for these to exist is compatibility with Windows
> and NFSv4 spec.  It's just that they are not _completely_ ignored, like SYNCHRONIZE
> or READ_XATTR/WRITE_XATTR are.
>
Now I understand. This is only for "deny" rules.
Thanks a lot.