similar to: acl_xattr vs. acl_tdb

Hi! Does anyone know how many ACLs can be stored on file system (xfs) using acl_xattr module and in file file_ntacls.tdb? Best regards /Adrian Berlin -- You Rock! Your E-Mail Should Too! Signup Now at Rock.com and get 250MB of Storage! http://webmail.rock.com/signup/

Hello, When I am using module acl_tdb and I am trying to get access to directory I am getting call trace in log.ip Best regards! /Adrian Berlin =============================================================== [2010/03/24 13:54:05.295901, 0] lib/fault.c:47(fault_report) INTERNAL ERROR: Signal 11 in pid 15556 (3.5.1) Please read the Trouble-Shooting section of the Samba3-HOWTO [2010/03/24

yes i have, this is my share-config: [share] path = /mnt/gluster/daten/share/ public = yes writeable = yes browseable = yes inherit permissions = Yes inherit acls = Yes map acl inherit = Yes nt acl support = yes vfs objects = acl_xattr F?bio Leandro Rodrigues Cordeiro schrieb: > Hi, > > Have you tried adding the share writeable? > [share] > writeable = yes > > att, >

Hi, I had issues using"vfs objects = acl_xattr" (possibly too old version [Version 4.13.13-Debian] for the needed "acl_xattr:security_acl_name = user.samba" option needed if running in a non-priv container). So I tried "vfs objects = acl_tdb" and found it working. In https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/File_System_Support I found: File systems without xattr support

Hi, i have a running samba+ctdb installation with samba as a domain-member. everything works but the acl's. The users want to be able to set permissions on the share. glusterfs does not support extended acls, so i am using acl_xattr. xattr is installed and i can manually set attributes using setfattr on the shared-directory. if i try to set the permissions using a winxp client i'll get a

Hello, How to manage acl from command line when using acl_tdb module?

Hello, What is simplest way to backup/restore acl's if using acl_tdb module? Thanks.

Hi, Can someone please guide me in deciding which specific CentOS Linux version viz 5.8 and 6.3 be used in Live production environment. Any merits and demerits of using either of these versions. Regards Kaushal

Hi, It looks like each flavor chooses to save references in its own way. The GNU flavor (ELF) uses a single vector of references and uses referenceStartIndex/referenceEndIndex to point to the references for each DefinedAtom. Darwin(Mach-O) / WinLink (PECOFF) uses a different way of storing references ? Is there a plan to make the WinLink/Darwin(Mach-O) use a single vector of references too

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

Hi! I have few question to developers of VFS ACL modules (acl_tdb and acl_xattr): 1. Do you plan to extend quantity of entries in acl_tdb (now I can write 22 user ACLs plus CREATOR OWNER, CREATOR GROUP, domain users and everyone) 2. Do you plan to fix few ACLs eg. Traverse folder / Execute file (to traverse I need to enable additional permission List folder / read data to traverse through

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hello, I'm trying to setup a CTDB-Cluster together with GLusterFS. GlusterFS is running great. CTDB can connect to the gluster-volume. I can store files, using Windows or Linux, and set new acls on the commandline of the cluster. BUT as soon as I try to set permissions via windows it fails with "the request is not supported" I use

Is behavior of ACLs under Samba 3.3.0 (Sernet) completely different from that under version 3.2.7? The release notes only talks about some "fixes". I installed version 3.3.0 and got completely different result with the same filesystem and the exact same samba configuration. The ACLs behaved strangely and appeared very different under Windows ACL editor. Users were now unable to

My organization is in the position of having to support full Windows ACLs on CIFS shares. We've been successfully utilizing Samba 3.5.10-125 and vfs_acl_tdb to accomplish that. However, the size of the resulting /var/lib/samba/state/file_ntacls.tdb[.unique-extension] file(s) has introduced some new problems for me to solve. In our environment, it seems on average each stored ACL causes

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 To show what we did here the entry in /etc/fstab: knoten-01:/gv0 /glusterfs glusterfs defaults,_netdev,acl,selinux 0 0 Am 17.11.2015 um 18:22 schrieb Michael Adam: > We just analyzed the situation together, and the solution is that > in order to access security.FOOBAR xattrs on the gluster fuse > mount, you have to specify the

Hi Rowland, Thanks for taking the time to look at this. I will post the log 10 output a bit later. Btw, what logs with log level 10 are you interested in? Here’s my samba config with sensitive info replaced with placeholders: [global] access based share enum = yes browseable = yes comment = <COMMENT> create mask = 0660 directory mask =

Hey all. I was an "early" adopter of mp3 (1994-1995), and I took great pains to use digital audio extractors and avoid jitter and whatnot thru proper hardware - back then, this was no mean feat. Well, I'm starting to switch to Ogg (dragging out all the CD's, starting over) and I want to know if anyone has an informed opinion on the merits or demerits of "normalization"

Hello, Does anyone test ZFS on Linux and ACLs? I can't setup POSIX ACLs and any extended even using acl_xattr or acl_tdb. Is any way to use ACLs with ZFS on Linux (Samba 3 or 4)? Best regards /Adrian Berlin --

Yes On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 9:57 AM, Rowland Penny via samba < samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > On Mon, 9 Jan 2017 09:35:08 -0600 > Sergei Gerasenko <sgerasenko74 at gmail.com> wrote: > > > Ok, reviewing the configs I posted before, I screwed up big time by > > posting the example share config into the global config. So sorry > > about that. > > >

I have ACLs working for files with the following set in my share definitions: inherit permissions = yes inherit acls=yes map acl inherit=yes vfs_objects = acl_tdb While testing my Samba configuration, I found that permissions are being set to 'special' for directories being copied from Windows instead of the ACL being fully populated. Does Samba 3.6 fully implement ACLS, or are