Bug 6913 - I can save only one type of ACL for directories; user or default
I can save only one type of ACL for directories; user or default
Status: NEW
Product: CifsVFS
Classification: Unclassified
Component: kernel fs
2.6
x86 Linux
: P3 normal
: ---
Assigned To: Steve French
:
Depends on:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2009-11-20 15:09 UTC by Jörg Sommer
Modified: 2009-11-20 15:22 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:


Attachments
strace of the smbd process which reproducing this bug (29.61 KB, text/plain)
2009-11-20 15:18 UTC, Jörg Sommer
no flags Details
Dump of the network traffic while reproducing this bug (6.98 KB, application/octet-stream)
2009-11-20 15:22 UTC, Jörg Sommer
no flags Details

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Jörg Sommer 2009-11-20 15:09:57 UTC
Hi,

I'm using Linux 2.6.31-rc5 on the client and Samba 3.4.3 on the server and Linux 2.6.30 on the server. I've the problem that the other ACL type vanishes when changing one. Here's an example what I mean:

% mkdir test

% getfacl test 
# file: test
# owner: joerg
# group: adm
user::rwx
group::r-x
other::r-x

% setfacl -m u:www-data:r-x test
% getfacl test                  
# file: test
# owner: joerg
# group: adm
user::rwx
user:www-data:r-x
group::r-x
mask::r-x
other::r-x


% setfacl -m d:u:www-data:rwx test
% getfacl test                    
# file: test
# owner: joerg
# group: adm
user::rwx
group::r-x
other::r-x
default:user::rwx
default:user:www-data:rwx
default:group::r-x
default:mask::rwx
default:other::r-x

When setting the default ACL rule for www-data the user:www-data rule vanishes. And when I set the user rule again, the default rule is lost.

% setfacl -m u:www-data:r-x test  
% getfacl test
# file: test
# owner: joerg
# group: adm
user::rwx
user:www-data:r-x
group::r-x
mask::r-x
other::r-x

I've enabled ACLs on for the filesystem on the server. I'm using ext3 as filesystem.
Comment 1 Jörg Sommer 2009-11-20 15:18:27 UTC
Created attachment 4969 [details]
strace of the smbd process which reproducing this bug
Comment 2 Jörg Sommer 2009-11-20 15:22:01 UTC
Created attachment 4970 [details]
Dump of the network traffic while reproducing this bug