similar to: [Bug 1953] Implementation of xattr in sftp-server for sshfs

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1953 --- Comment #3 from Christoph Anton Mitterer <calestyo at scientia.net> --- Does anyone know whether anything is going on with SFTP (especially also with repsect to ACLs and XATTRs)? More than a year ago we saw this http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-moonesamy-secsh-filexfer-00 which apparently tried to restart the draft-ietf-secsh-filexfer

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1953 TJ Saunders <tj at castaglia.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |tj at castaglia.org --- Comment #6 from TJ Saunders <tj at castaglia.org> --- Instead of using custom SFTP

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1953 Christoph Anton Mitterer <calestyo at scientia.net> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |calestyo at scientia.net --- Comment #2 from Christoph Anton Mitterer <calestyo at

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1953 Bug #: 1953 Summary: Implementation of xattr in sftp-server for sshfs Classification: Unclassified Product: Portable OpenSSH Version: 5.9p1 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Keywords: patch Severity: enhancement Priority: P2

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1953 Damien Miller <djm at mindrot.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |WONTFIX --- Comment #7 from Damien Miller <djm at

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1953 --- Comment #9 from Christoph Anton Mitterer <calestyo at scientia.net> --- Especially since Eberhard's patch doesn't them *that* intrusive to other parts of openssh, wouldn't simply be possible to use something like RFC 2389,... so server and client could negotiate whether things beyond the basic features are supported and

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1953 --- Comment #8 from Christoph Anton Mitterer <calestyo at scientia.net> --- What a pity... it seemed to be something quite useful for many cases. AFAIU, the only reason not to support it was staying at the base level of the sftp "standard"... however, OpenSSH goes in so many places way beyond the standards... -- You are

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1953 Stef Bon <stefbon at gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |stefbon at gmail.com --- Comment #5 from Stef Bon <stefbon at gmail.com> --- I agree with others: xattr support

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1953 Damien Miller <djm at mindrot.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |CLOSED --- Comment #10 from Damien Miller <djm at mindrot.org> --- Close all resolved bugs after 7.3p1 release

Hello, Renaming a file via sftp on an sshfs mount resulted in a failure with errorcode 38 (ENOSYS). This is reproducable with openssh release 4.9p1 & 5.1p1 in combination sshfs 2.2 (latest releases). Investigation revealed that sshfs only implements the rename()-call and not the link()-call (used by sftp-server). Attached is a patch to perform the rename()-call upon a failed link(). The

> On Dec 3, 2007 5:19 AM, Miklos Szeredi <miklos at szeredi.hu> wrote: > > > Yes it is weird. I hope you can help me with this problem as sshfs is > > > so much simpler than nfs. > > > > Can you please do one more thing: start up sshfs normally, then on the > > server do a strace of the sftp-server process: > > > > strace -o /tmp/strace.log

Hello, I've gathered from searching Bugzilla[1][2] that a patch to update OpenSSH's SFTP implementation to support version 4 or above of the protocol is unlikely to be accepted. However, I find myself wishing for the name-based owner and group handling specified in version 4 of the spec[3]. As a possible compromise, if I submitted a patch to add an OpenSSH-specific extension to return

Hello, This is probably a long email, but please bear with me. I plan to submit a patch and would like to explain what I will do before doing it so I don't lose time if there's some flaw in my plan. I currently use sshfs to mount directories from some computers and a NAS into other computers. I recently noticed that when copying some files from one computer into one of these sshfs

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1286 Summary: SFTP keeps reading input until it runs out of buffer space Product: Portable OpenSSH Version: v4.5p1 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Keywords: patch Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: sftp

Hi, I have sshfs and ssh to my host setup to use the same socket with ControlMaster setting. Now when I try to scp a file to/from my host I see poor transfer speed. Also, a cp-ing a file to the mounted filesystem results in poor throughput. On the other hand, if I don't use the multiplexing, I get very good throughput. Now, my question is, when I multiplex, does the IPQoS get set wrongly for a

What to try: $ cd /tmp $ touch a b $ sftp localhost sftp> cd /tmp sftp> rename a b Couldn't rename file "/tmp/a" to "/tmp/b": Failure sftp> rm b Removing /var/tmp/b sftp> rename a b sftp> So, the sftp "rename" command refuses to rename a file to an existing one. Instead of using the rename(2) system call, which is present at least on

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2067 Bug ID: 2067 Summary: lsetstat extension to sftp-server Classification: Unclassified Product: Portable OpenSSH Version: 6.1p1 Hardware: Other OS: Other Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5 Component: sftp-server

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7424 Summary: -x with sshfs Product: rsync Version: 3.0.7 Platform: x64 OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: minor Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned at samba.org ReportedBy: bugs at dotcommie.net QAContact: rsync-qa at

Hi, I saw in archive that some people made a patch to sftp-server, and that patch sets a root path. I'd like to know if there's an ideia to apply that patch in main tree of openssh? With the use of SSHFS [wich uses sftp-server], it would be interesting to have someting like that, because as we have netboot workstations, the access to devices [such as, floppy, cdrom and usb data] are

Hi, I made this simple path to make sftp-server restricted to a basepath! This was done because use sshfs [wich base is sftp-server] to allow people access medias [ cdrom,dvdrom, floppy, usb] from x-terms. Those x-terms [ diskless] does not have all users, so we share a single user and a DSA empty passphrase, with some acl scipts at .ssh/authorized keys. Main usage of this patch is to NOT