search for: shellenbaum

...2-24-2009 we need to renew the members that are still contributing at core contributor levels. We should also add some new members to both Contributor and Core contributor levels. First the current list of Core contributors: Bill Moore (billm) Cindy Swearingen (cindys) Lori M. Alt (lalt) Mark Shellenbaum (marks) Mark Maybee (maybee) Matthew A. Ahrens (ahrens) Neil V. Perrin (perrin) Jeff Bonwick (bonwick) Eric Schrock (eschrock) Noel Dellofano (ndellofa) Eric Kustarz (goo)* Georgina A. Chua (chua)* Tabriz Holtz (tabriz)* Krister Johansen (johansen)* All of these should be renewed at Core contribut...

Hi, S10U3: It seems, that ufs POSIX-ACLs are not properly translated to zfs ACL4 entries, when one xfers a directory tree from UFS to ZFS. Test case: Assuming one has an user A and B, both belonging to group G and having their umask set to 022: 1) On UFS - as user A do: mkdir /dir chmod 0775 /dir setfacl -m d:u::rwx,d:g::rwx,d:o:r-x,d:m:rwx /dir # samba would

Here is a draft of the fast track to allow ZFS to inherit mode permission via owner@, group@ and everyone@ -Mark -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: aclinherit.fasttrack URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/attachments/20080319/42e8ace7/attachment.ksh>

I have OSol 2009.06 (b111a), and I''m not sure I''m getting this ZFS ACL thing: %whoami abalfour % ls -V file ----------+ 1 abalfour root 1474560 May 11 18:43 file owner@:-w--d--A-W-C--:-------:deny according to that ACL I shouldn''t be able to write anything having to do with file, correct? % cat >> file zsh: permission denied: file % mv file

ZFS introduces a new and incompatible ACL interface into Solaris and this seems to be not yet fully completed in addition to the fact that is causes a lot of problems for software that needs to be compatible with Solaris-2.5 like star. Proof for incompatibility: create a file on UFS and set an ACL for this file. Use Sun tar cpf out file to archive this file. Unpack this archive file on ZFS

I have a weekly scrub setup, and I''ve seen at least once now where it says "don''t snapshot while scrubbing" Is this a data integrity issue, or will it make one or both of the processes take longer? Thanks

As part of looking into a minor issue with the group listed when using runat(1) on a UFS filesystem for Johannes (my Google Summer of Code student work on new basic file privs), I discovered an even bigger issue with UFS and extended attributes. I''ve cc''d ZFS discuss because I used ZFS as the comparison and I believe that ZFS is acting correctly but even then it might not be

...ouch is not calling chmod(), also the same happens with mkdir.1 (which also doesn''t call chmod()). To summarize: ACLs are not inherited when aclmode = discard. Why is this? Afaik this should not be the case. Thanks! -f [1] http://arc.opensolaris.org/caselog/PSARC/2010/029/20100126_mark.shellenbaum

...blue. While writing this, I stumbled into this thread: http://tinyurl.com/7ofxfj. Ok, so it seems that this is "intended" behavior to comply with POSIX. As the author of the thread mentioned, I would like to see an inheritance mode that completely ignores POSIX. The thread ends with Mark Shellenbaum commenting that he will fasttrack "the behavior that many people want". It is not clear to me what exactly he means by this. Then I found http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/819-5461/ftyxi?l=zh&a=view and much to my confusion, the deny ACEs aren''t created in example 8-10. How c...

Hi, Is it expected that if I have filesystem tank/foo and tank/foo/bar (mounted under /tank) then in order to be able to browse via /net down into tank/foo/bar I need to have group/other permissions on /tank/foo open? # zfs create tank/foo # zfs create tank/foo/bar # chown gavinm /tank/foo /tank/foo/bar # zfs set sharenfs=rw tank/foo # ls -laR /tank/foo /tank/foo: total 9 drwxr-xr-x 3 gavinm

I''m currently prototyping a Solaris file server that will dish out user home directories and group project directories via NFSv4 and Samba. I have samba configured and integrated into our local active directory, with ACL mapping working. I''m a little confused as to the behavior of the ZFS ACL though. on a brand-new filesystem, touching a file results in: -rw-r--r-- 1 root

Hello all, Is there any way to mount zfs file system from vfstab? Thanks, Chris

This may be a dumb question, but is there a way to find out if an arbitrary filesystem is actually a zfs filesystem? Like if I were to write a script that needs to do different steps based on the underlying filesystem. Any pointers welcome. -- Jan Hendrik Mangold Sun Microsystems 650-585-5484 (x81371) "idle hands are the developers workshop" -------------- next part

I''ve tried to set up a SAMBA file server that acts completely identical with a Microsoft Windows 2000 or 2003 one. First of all, the problem with the ACI ordering is simple: The Microsoft ACI specification imposes that the DENY ACIs are put on top. It can be solved with a simple chmod. Problem no.2 the Samba NFSv4 ACL module doesn''t interpret owner@, group@, everyone at . While

I am the maintainer of GDM, and I am noticing that GDM has a problem when running on a ZFS filesystem, as with Indiana. When GDM (the GNOME Display Manager) starts the login GUI, it runs the following commands on Solaris: /usr/bin/setfacl -m user:gdm:rwx,mask:rwx /dev/audio /usr/bin/setfacl -m user:gdm:rwx,mask:rwx /dev/audioctl It does this because the login GUI programs are run as the

I''ve just installed express b28 on my system. After installing, I decided to move /opt to a zfs pool home/opt. After installing Blastwave''s latest sudo, I did my usual edits of sudoers. When I attempted to execute sudo ls to test things I got this: rtfm:/opt/csw/etc:>sudo ls sudo: /opt/csw/etc/sudoers is owned by gid 1, should be 0 But /opt/csw/etc/sudoers permissions

Hi. I''ve almost all file system functions working. I started to run some heavy file system regression tests. They work. fsx wasn''t able to break my port, but the test you can find here: http://people.freebsd.org/~kan/fsstress.tar.gz broke it. My kernel panics on this assertion (zfs_dir.c): 749: mutex_exit(&dzp->z_lock); 750: 751: error =

This is possibly the dumbest question I have asked ever, but how do you set ACLs on files within a ZFS filesystem? Trying to use setfacl(1) diverts me to the acl(5) manpage; well, I know that I need to use NFSv4 style ACLs, but where is the utility to do so? This is on Solaris 10 Update 2. Thanks, Ceri -- That must be wonderful! I don''t understand it at all.

On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 11:05 PM, Richard Elling <Richard.Elling at sun.com> wrote: > Philip Brown wrote: >> I''ve recently started down the road of production use for zfs, and am hitting my head on some paradigm shifts. I''d like to clarify whether my understanding is correct, and/or whether there are better ways of doing things. >> I have one question for

Hi, I am having a problem porting Solaris R/W lock functionality to Linux. The problem is that RW_LOCK_HELD() doesn''t have an equivalent function in pthreads. This was not a problem before because RW_LOCK_HELD() was only used in ASSERT statements. In this case, I was able to make it work by making it behave a bit differently (specifically, it would return true if *any* thread was