similar to: Rrsync3.1.3x POSIX ACLs conversion to NFS v4 ACLs question

Hey everyone, after we finished the introduction of the new posix acl api last cycle we still left the generic POSIX ACL xattr handler around for two reasons. First, because a few filesystems relied on the ->list() method of the generic POSIX ACL xattr handlers in their ->listxattr() inode operation. Second, during inode initalization in inode_init_always() the registered xattr handlers in

Hi, this is the first time I've tryed to build a 64 Bit Version with acl's enabled - so I expect I could duplicate this with older versions too... Here's the build info: System: AIX 6100-07-01-1141 Compiler: IBM xlc CC=xlc_r -g CXX=xlC_r CFLAGS=-qmaxmem=-1 -DSYSV -D_AIX -D_AIX32 -D_AIX41 -D_AIX43 -D_AIX51 -D_AIX52 -D_AIX53 -D_AIX61 -D_ALL_SOURCE -DFUNCPROTO=15 -O

Hi, I have the following string that I converted to a POSIXct: > a <- "2009-08-24 10:00:00.213" > a.p <- strptime(a,"%Y-%m-%d %H:%M:%OS") > as.double(as.POSIXct(a.p)) [1] 1251122400 I can't seem to get the decimal fraction of .213 out by casting to double or numeric. Is there anyway to make sure that POSIXct spits that out? Thank you. adschai

Hi, I'm working with objects of classes "Date","POSIXlt" and "POSIXct" and still having some Date/Time-related concepts unclear. In the documentation of "as.Date" one can find: "The 'as.Date' methods accept ... '"POSIXlt"' and '"POSIXct"'. (The last are converted to days by ignoring the time after

At the suggestion of Stas, I'm starting a new thread on this one. This pretty much covers where I'm at right now: Doug, thanks, here's a complete listing of the config file, and some logging, hopefully this will be illuminating to somebody. > Neither of these lines set the log level. Yes, I've been setting it in the init script. When I do ps -ef | grep smbd, I see that

I'd very much appreciate some help with a rather major problem I'm having. I have a Dell 6450 quad Xeon Processor machine with 8GB of RAM and 1TB of disk (RAIDed with an Adaptec 5400S RAID controller). It is running samba (2.2.8) to server up files to around 2300 Windows 2000 machines. The machine was originally installed and configured around September 2002. It had been running

btrfs returned the acl info though it was mounted with "noacl" option. Steps to reproduce: # mkfs.btrfs /dev/sda2 # mount /dev/sda2 /mnt # touch /mnt/file0 # setfacl -m ''u:root:x,g::x,o::x'' /mnt/file0 # umount /mnt # mount /dev/sda2 -o noacl /mnt # getfacl /mnt/file0 we add a noacl check for btrfs_get_acl() to fix it. Signed-off-by: Miao Xie

We are using SAMBA 3.6.6 on Centos 5 with the acl_tdb VFS module. Our share is backed by storage on a SAN devices that does not support ACLs or extended attributes ... so we're trying the acl_tdb module as a mechanism to support Windows ACLs. We have verified that samba has ACL support enabled, and ACL support works find if we export the share from the local EXT4 filesystem. When trying to

I'm looking for info on using posix acls in samba. I'd like them to look and feel like nt acls. I'd like to use the windows client to set the acls on the samba server. I've got the official samba 3 howto book, but can't seem to figure things out from there. specifically, in the past I've used a force group entry in combined with create modes to keep shared files access to

Is anyone looking at supporting the POSIX extended ACLs? Thanks! Trevor

Hello, I have recently set up a Samba based file server running 3.0.27a. This file server is part of a Windows 2003 domain, with ACL and extended attribute support enabled, and appears to be functioning properly except for one critical issue with the ACLs. When I try to edit the permissions of a file through Windows, the default POSIX ACL that I set up on the filesystem seems to be masking off

Hi all, we are experiencing difficulties with posix ACLs using samba 3.0.28 on a Debian 4.0 etch server. The goal is to not let the Windows clients manage the ACLs but instead set the permissions from the Samba server, hence smb.conf says "nt acl support = no". Problems arise when I have a directory with default permissions for a named group, e.g. # file: ACLTest # owner: juergen #

Skipped content of type multipart/mixed-------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/rsync/attachments/20050831/54e830f9/attachment.bin

We currently set sb->s_flags |= MS_POSIXACL unconditionally, which is incorrect -- it tells the VFS that it shouldn''t set umask because we will, yet we don''t set it ourselves if we aren''t using POSIX ACLs, so the umask ends up ignored. Signed-off-by: Chris Ball <cjb@laptop.org> --- fs/btrfs/super.c | 2 ++ 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

Hi, I have set up a samba 3.0.7 server with acl-support on an xfs filesystem. Everything is working as expected from the server/Windows client view. I can create/modify files, I can see the acls, fine. Now I have a linux-client which is using the same samba-server. Also here works _nearly_ everything as expected. If the owner or group of the directory/file is allowed to modify the file, everyting

I'm going crazy trying to deal with file and directory perms set by Samba's attempt to echo Windows ACLs. I log in directly to my Linux box and tweak ACLs until they work exactly like I wish them to. But when I then access those files through Samba, I get _different_results_, apparently because Samba is trying awfully hard to emulate Windows. How can I tell Samba when handling perms to

Hello samba team ! On my network, I mainly manage my AD users and computers from Unix using shell scripts. So I would like to set the shares' ACLs directly from the DC with the POSIX setfacl command. When exporting with NFSv4, the POSIX ACLs are conserved. I can set the permissions the same manner as for my local users. But on DC, the "rwx" right is mapped to "full

It looks like this is a long known issue: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10792 On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 10:30 AM, Sergei Gerasenko <gerases at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi everybody, > > I know this has been discussed ad naseum, but I can't find an answer to my > question precisely. > > My version of samba is 4.2.10. > > Here's my question. I have

Am 12.08.2016 um 18:57 schrieb Jeremy Allison via samba: > On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 11:20:47AM -0500, Sergei Gerasenko via samba wrote: >> It looks like this is a long known issue: >> >> https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10792 > > If by long known you mean "as designed". As Samba supports > ACL setting on files/directories we don't restrict what

Am 12.08.2016 um 19:40 schrieb Jeremy Allison: > On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 07:27:00PM +0200, Reindl Harald via samba wrote: >> >> Am 12.08.2016 um 18:57 schrieb Jeremy Allison via samba: >>> On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 11:20:47AM -0500, Sergei Gerasenko via samba wrote: >>>> It looks like this is a long known issue: >>>> >>>>