Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2010 23:46:05 +0100 From: =?iso-8859-2?Q?Edward_Tomasz_Napiera=B3a?= <trasz@FreeBSD.org> To: Joe Auty <joe@netmusician.org> Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Migrating from NFSv3 to v4 - NFSv4 ACL/permission confusion Message-ID: <408E7ECD-C232-47DD-9D24-389F2CA4E406@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <4CFD6506.7090901@netmusician.org> References: <1124305635.1255931.1291670668724.JavaMail.root@erie.cs.uoguelph.ca> <4CFD5D73.1050601@netmusician.org> <F8F7A4F9-7E1F-4B32-98D3-F595063238D7@FreeBSD.org> <4CFD6506.7090901@netmusician.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Wiadomo=B6=E6 napisana przez Joe Auty w dniu 2010-12-06, o godz. 23:34: > Edward Tomasz Napiera=B3a wrote: >> Wiadomo=B6=E6 napisana przez Joe Auty w dniu 2010-12-06, o godz. = 23:02: >>>> Also, make sure "ls -l" is not reporting "nobody". If the = user/group >>>> name mapping isn't working, most Setattr Ops will fail. >>>>=20 >>>> rick >>>>=20 >>> Thanks Rick, >>>=20 >>> I will look into this, but for the benefit of my own education, are >>> NFSv4 ACLs supposed to be intertwined or separate from standard Unix >>> permissions? I'm confused as to how the ACLs have changed from v3, = or if >>> this is even relevant to my problem not really knowing how they work = and >>> why they are needed :) >>=20 >> Both POSIX.1e and NFSv4 ACLs are similar in that they both influence >> the mode, and get influenced by it. In other words, when you change >> the ACL, the mode gets updated; when you change the mode, the ACL = gets >> updated. Also, for both POSIX.1e and NFSv4 ACLs, file mode continues >> to work as usual if you ignore the ACL part. >>=20 > Thanks for this! >=20 > 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? If you want to just ignore the ACLs on account of not needing anything beyond the file mode, aka standard UNIX permissions. Filesystems support either POSIX.1e ACLs, or NFSv4 ACLs, not both. I didn't actually test NFSv4, but I guess it uses NFSv4 ACLs, not POSIX.1e. ZFS supports NFSv4 only. UFS supports either POSIX.1e or NFSv4, depending on the mount options. -- If you cut off my head, what would I say? Me and my head, or me and my = body?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?408E7ECD-C232-47DD-9D24-389F2CA4E406>