search for: libsunacl

Anyone know if there's a configure option for Samba4 to take advantage of this. Would like to NOT use eadb. Thoughts? Cheers,

Really nice write-up on the Samba-based Open Source project ! https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2020/07/an-easy-mode-for-zfs-we-test-the-truenas-core-12-0-beta/ Congratulations to the FreeNAS/TrueNAS folks ! Jeremy.

...h NTFS (Windows) ACLs in mind. 3. Samba4 started with a new ntvfs file server but that was abandoned (or delayed?) to get samba4 released 4. Samba4 was released with s3fs as a default (the "old" Samba3 smbd) 5. s3fs is relying on POSIX ACLs which are not implemented on ZFS 6. There is a libsunacl library, a wrapper around FreeBSD ZFS NFSv4 ACLs I can install an experimental module but cannot provision AD with s3fs. 7. The provisioning with ntvfs seems to work For me, there are two uncertainties: a) Will be ntvfs supported in the future? Or will it be the default later? b) Will s3fs gai...

...) wrapper around libzfs so that community members who want to use some of the nice features of libzfs for writing their own VFS modules will have an easier, and more documented / stable API for doing this. B) FreeBSD related 1) vfs_ixnas uses native FreeBSD ACL APIs rather than passing through the libsunacl shim layer. This means that we use fd-based calls (acl_get_fd_np(), etc) where possible. 2) vfs_ixnas uses FreeBSD kernel DOS modes 3) (new in Beta / nightlies). We use a kqueue-based libtevent backend. 4) vfs_aio_fbsd uses libtevent / kqueue to perform POSIX AIO (using AIO kevents) by submitting a...

...'force user' is used, samba needs additional flags for group owning the file. Not sure if it was there all the time and it's just me, or may be this is an intended behaviour (I hope not), so, anyway I'll describe it. I'm using ZFS and NFSv4 ACLs on all of my servers, along with libsunacl library and zfsacl vfs object. It's reproducible on all recent 4.1.x, 4.2.x and 4.3.x versions. Suppose I have a share: [test] comment = Test Directory path = /var/www/test guest ok = no browseable = yes writable = yes printable = no create mask = 664 directory mask = 775 map hidden = no ma...

Dear Samba friends, Last weekend I decided to upgrade the samba server. We were running Samba 3.3 something and FreeBSD portupgrade was complaining that this version should be removed and assumingly replaced by the newest version. I removed the package via portupgrade and installed the 3.5.6 version. The upgrade went quite smoothly in general, but I encountered some difficulties with the printer

Dear Samba friends, Last weekend I decided to upgrade the samba server. We were running Samba 3.3 something and FreeBSD portupgrade was complaining that this version should be removed and assumingly replaced by the newest version. I removed the package via portupgrade and installed the 3.5.6 version. The upgrade went quite smoothly in general, but I encountered some difficulties with the printer