Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 12:19:53 +1000 From: Michael Vince <mv@thebeastie.org> To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, rapopp@eastcentral.edu Subject: Re: kern.ngroups question Message-ID: <469ECA49.8050101@thebeastie.org> In-Reply-To: <4665B28A.7060608@elischer.org> References: <200706051149.45787.rapopp@eastcentral.edu> <4665B28A.7060608@elischer.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Julian Elischer wrote: > Reuben A. Popp wrote: >> Hello all, >> >> Can someone explain to me the rationale behind having ngroups_max set >> to 16 by default? >> > > NFS only supports this much by default (from memory). > > Samba (in the guise of Jeremy Allison) > has asked us to follow Linux's lead and support an arbitrary number of > Groups > but it hasn't happened yet, Partly due to the question of "what to do > about NFS" and partly just due to ENOTIME. I think at the very least that there should be some more obvious warnings about this potentially serious limitation in either release notes of FreeBSD and or Samba. I just had to deal with this limitation and it was quite annoying to say the least, it appears Samba is somewhat deliberately designed to give you a hard time when you run into this limit, because as soon as you add a user to more than 16 groups it declares the group file unreadable and as a security measure shuts down all shares and authentication which wrecks a network which relies on Samba. Also as far as I know Solaris and Linux has long gone past this limitation. Mike
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?469ECA49.8050101>