Hello there friends & foes, I've had if with M$ windows! Next week I'll sabotage my shop (how 'bout password protecting dualboots on WS) and force LINUX down my users' throats ;-) (oh, don't I like this tone... makes me feel Billy G.) Oops, showstopper! ACL enabled network filesystem, where is it? I can't go with alpha code nfs4, so is there a patch to the smb kernel modules that provides support to ACLs? (I mean... the server does!!) Even a userland daemon will do... I'm ready to patch, test, anything to get NT4 off my back. Ciao, Edo Don't mind the clock, it's skewed -- 3:32am up 6:59, 1 user, load average: 1.22, 0.95, 0.78
http://acl.bestbits.at ? Edoardo Causarano wrote:> > Hello there friends & foes, > > I've had if with M$ windows! Next week I'll sabotage my shop (how 'bout > password protecting dualboots on WS) and force LINUX down my users' throats > ;-) (oh, don't I like this tone... makes me feel Billy G.) Oops, showstopper! > ACL enabled network filesystem, where is it? I can't go with alpha code nfs4, > so is there a patch to the smb kernel modules that provides support to ACLs? > (I mean... the server does!!) Even a userland daemon will do... I'm ready to > patch, test, anything to get NT4 off my back. > > Ciao, > Edo > > Don't mind the clock, it's skewed > -- > 3:32am up 6:59, 1 user, load average: 1.22, 0.95, 0.78 > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the > instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
On Wed, 18 Sep 2002, Edoardo Causarano wrote:> ACL enabled network filesystem, where is it? I can't go with alpha code nfs4, > so is there a patch to the smb kernel modules that provides support to ACLs? > (I mean... the server does!!) Even a userland daemon will do... I'm ready to > patch, test, anything to get NT4 off my back.There are no patches I am aware of that adds ACLs to smbfs. (how does an ACL enabled client help you with NT4?) I have no intention of touching that until the ACL patches are accepted in the main kernel (last I heard there was still some discussion on what the right way(tm) to do it was). I simply don't have to time for that. If someone else wants to, I do accept smbfs patches. Preferrably vs 2.5 for something this experimental. /Urban
Fisrt thing, excuse me for replying with OE, I'm not @ my PC @ the moment ;-)> ACL enabled network filesystem, where is it? I can't go with alpha codenfs4,> so is there a patch to the smb kernel modules that provides support toACLs?> (I mean... the server does!!) Even a userland daemon will do... I'm readyto> patch, test, anything to get NT4 off my back.There are no patches I am aware of that adds ACLs to smbfs. (how does an ACL enabled client help you with NT4?) I have no intention of touching that until the ACL patches are accepted in the main kernel (last I heard there was still some discussion on what the right way(tm) to do it was). I simply don't have to time for that. If someone else wants to, I do accept smbfs patches. Preferrably vs 2.5 for something this experimental. /Urban The ACL client would allow us to ditch NT4 and go UNIX from server to workstation. In such an environment one would use nfs3 but that's not enough for desktop use as ACLs are easier to maintain and work with rather than UGO permissions. NFS4 isn't up to snuff yet so I thought that if smbd supports ACLs on XFS, ACL_ext3 one could add the code to fetch these extended attributes to the smb filesystem module (I understand that such patches would require the presence of the bestbits patches). Usually one would use smb.o to interoperate with M$, in my case I'd like to use it as an interim/definitive alternative to nfs in a fully UNIX shop. Ciao, Edo -- No uptime sig from here.... sigh!