Hello, I''m trying to setup my ZFS volumes but I can''t get the permissions working. I have created one pool and multiple volumes: root:tessier:~# zpool list NAME SIZE USED AVAIL CAP HEALTH ALTROOT local 264G 21.7G 242G 8% ONLINE - root:tessier:~# zfs list NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT local 21.7G 240G 17K /local local/DVDs 2.25G 17.7G 2.25G /local/DVDs local/Saved 528M 240G 528M /local/Saved according to https://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/zfs/intro/ then I changed the permissions (via chmod(1)) so that I can write to those directories. e.g.: root:tessier:~# ls -ald /local/DVDs/ drwxr-xr-x 8 vklocal sys 8 Apr 3 16:43 /local/DVDs/ and vklocal:tessier:/local/DVDs$ ls -al ./..: Permission denied total 14 drwxr-xr-x 8 vklocal sys 8 Apr 3 16:43 . dr-xr-xr-x 3 root root 3 Mar 31 16:16 .zfs drwxr-xr-x 4 vklocal staff 4 Apr 3 16:52 nevada It must have done some stupid error when setting up the volumes. Any idea how to get this fixed ? This message posted from opensolaris.org
Vladimir Kotal wrote:>Hello, > >I''m trying to setup my ZFS volumes but I can''t get the permissions working. I have created one pool and multiple volumes: > >root:tessier:~# zpool list >NAME SIZE USED AVAIL CAP HEALTH ALTROOT >local 264G 21.7G 242G 8% ONLINE - >root:tessier:~# zfs list >NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT >local 21.7G 240G 17K /local >local/DVDs 2.25G 17.7G 2.25G /local/DVDs >local/Saved 528M 240G 528M /local/Saved > >according to https://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/zfs/intro/ > >then I changed the permissions (via chmod(1)) so that I can write to those directories. >e.g.: > >root:tessier:~# ls -ald /local/DVDs/ >drwxr-xr-x 8 vklocal sys 8 Apr 3 16:43 /local/DVDs/ > >and > >vklocal:tessier:/local/DVDs$ ls -al >./..: Permission denied >total 14 >drwxr-xr-x 8 vklocal sys 8 Apr 3 16:43 . >dr-xr-xr-x 3 root root 3 Mar 31 16:16 .zfs >drwxr-xr-x 4 vklocal staff 4 Apr 3 16:52 nevada > >It must have done some stupid error when setting up the volumes. Any idea how to get this fixed ? >Try unmounting the filesystem, changing the permission on the mount point and then remounting it. Darren
On Tue, Apr 04, 2006 at 02:19:56AM -0700, Darren Reed wrote:> Vladimir Kotal wrote: > > >It must have done some stupid error when setting up the volumes. Any idea > >how to get this fixed ?This should of course read s/It/I/> > > Try unmounting the filesystem, changing the permission on the mount > point and then remounting it. >This fixed the problem, thanks for fast response. v.
>vklocal:tessier:/local/DVDs$ ls -al >./..: Permission denied >total 14 >drwxr-xr-x 8 vklocal sys 8 Apr 3 16:43 . >dr-xr-xr-x 3 root root 3 Mar 31 16:16 .zfs >drwxr-xr-x 4 vklocal staff 4 Apr 3 16:52 nevada > >It must have done some stupid error when setting up the volumes. Any idea how to get this fixed ?What''s your umask? I''ve not yet file a bug but I think that ZFS incorrectly uses the umask to create these mountpoints. Casper
Casper.Dik at sun.com wrote:> > >>vklocal:tessier:/local/DVDs$ ls -al >>./..: Permission denied >>total 14 >>drwxr-xr-x 8 vklocal sys 8 Apr 3 16:43 . >>dr-xr-xr-x 3 root root 3 Mar 31 16:16 .zfs >>drwxr-xr-x 4 vklocal staff 4 Apr 3 16:52 nevada >> >>It must have done some stupid error when setting up the volumes. Any idea how to get this fixed ? >> >> > > >What''s your umask? > >I''ve not yet file a bug but I think that ZFS incorrectly uses the umask >to create these mountpoints. > >I had problems with ZFS and umask in the beginning too...see 6238072. Darren
On Tue, Apr 04, 2006 at 11:31:50AM +0200, Casper.Dik at Sun.COM wrote:> > > >vklocal:tessier:/local/DVDs$ ls -al > >./..: Permission denied > >total 14 > >drwxr-xr-x 8 vklocal sys 8 Apr 3 16:43 . > >dr-xr-xr-x 3 root root 3 Mar 31 16:16 .zfs > >drwxr-xr-x 4 vklocal staff 4 Apr 3 16:52 nevada > > > >It must have done some stupid error when setting up the volumes. Any idea how to get this fixed ? > > > What''s your umask? >I am using 0077. I have bumped into too-strict-umask multiple times but it hasn''t convinced me to use more relaxed one. v.
On Tue, Apr 04, 2006 at 12:35:51PM +0200, Vladimir Kotal wrote:> On Tue, Apr 04, 2006 at 11:31:50AM +0200, Casper.Dik at Sun.COM wrote: > > > > > > >vklocal:tessier:/local/DVDs$ ls -al > > >./..: Permission denied > > >total 14 > > >drwxr-xr-x 8 vklocal sys 8 Apr 3 16:43 . > > >dr-xr-xr-x 3 root root 3 Mar 31 16:16 .zfs > > >drwxr-xr-x 4 vklocal staff 4 Apr 3 16:52 nevada > > > > > >It must have done some stupid error when setting up the volumes. Any idea how to get this fixed ? > > > > > > What''s your umask? > > > > I am using 0077. I have bumped into too-strict-umask multiple times > but it hasn''t convinced me to use more relaxed one.Ah, yes, since ZFS encourages filesystem promiscuity user umasks now matter more. We really need to see to it that the mount point''s shadowed vnode''s permissions no longer matter for .. traversal. Another side-effect of ZFS filesystem promiscuity: the lack of automatic NFSv4 client-side traversal of server-side mounts really hurts! Create a new filesystem in an existing, exported hierarchy and clients that already automount that existing hierarchy in /net (-hosts) won''t see the new filesystem. This is because automountd still relies on the NFSv3 MOUNT protocol to detect the hierarchy when the top of it is automounted in -hosts maps and then never asks again (how would it know to? well, that''s where NFSv4 comes in: the protocol makes it possible for the client to detect server-side mounts and dynamically mount those on the client-side, Solaris just doesn''t support that yet). Nico --
Nicolas Williams <Nicolas.Williams at Sun.COM> wrote:> Ah, yes, since ZFS encourages filesystem promiscuity user umasks now > matter more. We really need to see to it that the mount point''s > shadowed vnode''s permissions no longer matter for .. traversal.I really don''t understand why this bug has not been fixed in 1986 already. J?rg -- EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js at cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
>Nicolas Williams <Nicolas.Williams at Sun.COM> wrote: > >> Ah, yes, since ZFS encourages filesystem promiscuity user umasks now >> matter more. We really need to see to it that the mount point''s >> shadowed vnode''s permissions no longer matter for .. traversal. > >I really don''t understand why this bug has not been fixed in 1986 already.When was it introduced? Not before the VFS layer, I think, as the problem does not exist in ufs_namei() in earlier releases of SunOS. It does exist in the VFS releases (certainly SunOS 3.2 which was the earliest I worked with). (The earliest record I can find of myself being aware of this was in 1989) Casper
Casper.Dik at Sun.COM wrote:> > >Nicolas Williams <Nicolas.Williams at Sun.COM> wrote: > > > >> Ah, yes, since ZFS encourages filesystem promiscuity user umasks now > >> matter more. We really need to see to it that the mount point''s > >> shadowed vnode''s permissions no longer matter for .. traversal. > > > >I really don''t understand why this bug has not been fixed in 1986 already. > > > When was it introduced? Not before the VFS layer, I think, as the problem > does not exist in ufs_namei() in earlier releases of SunOS. It does > exist in the VFS releases (certainly SunOS 3.2 which was the earliest > I worked with). > > (The earliest record I can find of myself being aware of this was in 1989)It apeared with SunOS-4.0 J?rg -- EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js at cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily