Hi jerry, here is the bug report you asked me to submit at the SANE BoF If I mount a samba share with unix extensions, and my uid is not the same on the server and the client, I end up with a mount where the files that belong to me on the server do seemingly not belong to me on the client. Even though access is no problem applecations tend to get seriously confiused when I try to open a directory that belongs to someone else with permissions 700.
The cifs vfs mount options now include options for: 1) disabling the client side permission check 2) overriding the default behavior on newly created files (from that of the server to that of the client) see fs/cifs/README Are you proposing something like the new nfs uid mapping client pseudofilesystem approach to make this better? or ties to winbind?
here is an example * Machines A and B have different username/uid mappings * User "foo" on machine A uses cifs to connect to the account of user "bar" on machine B. * "foo" knows the right password and gets connected to the share of "bar" on machine B. * I would now expect that the files belonging to "bar" would appear as belonging to "foo" when seen on machine "A" because only this will ensure that unix applications accessing the files will behave correctly. * I could imaging that the fact that "bar" has full access is established via a fake ACL on the client side, but this seems like a lot more effort than required.
I *think* this is the issue I'm running into as well. I mount a remote share from our company file server on my Linux laptop using my remote un/pw, and I can't actually access any of my files because they have different UIDs. I just found out yesterday that this was caused by UNIX extensions being turned on at the server. I turned them off (luckily I happen to be one of our SAs, so I can actually do that), and it works as expected. Two thoughts: 1) Personally I think an adequate fix for this would be to have smbfs support an option for turning off UNIX extensions, even if they're turned on at the server. As it is I think I need server access in order to make my linux client connect to the server the right way for me, which is without extra UNIX extensions (I'm not 100% sure of that...and if this isn't the case, someone please enlighten me). 2) It seems like having your UIDs be the same on local and remote machines is probably not as common as having these UIDs be different (might want to poll some users to see). Should UNIX extensions maybe be turned off by default? I know for my particular set of Samba use cases, I'm probably never going to want or need them on (seems like this would be more handy for some sort of NFS-type setup), but I don't know other users' usage patterns.
No need to change smbfs, its replacement cifs vfs already has such an option ("echo 0 > /proc/fs/cifs/LinuxExtensionsEnabled" will disable them on the client)
closing. appears to be resolved aor at least a workaround is in place.
sorry for the same, cleaning up the database to prevent unecessary reopens of bugs.