From: Peter Astrand Subject: RE: [NFS] NFSv3 ACL status? Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 16:22:53 +0200 (CEST) Sender: acl-devel-bounces@bestbits.at Message-ID: References: <482A3FA0050D21419C269D13989C611302B07DC0@lavender-fe.eng.netapp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=iso-8859-1 Cc: nfs@lists.sourceforge.net, acl-devel@bestbits.at Return-path: To: "Lever, Charles" In-Reply-To: <482A3FA0050D21419C269D13989C611302B07DC0@lavender-fe.eng.netapp.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: acl-devel-bounces@bestbits.at List-ID: > > But: http://acl.bestbits.at/ seems to indicate that ACLs over=20 > > NFSv3 actually works, and provides patches for 2.6.1, but I=20 > > can't find any information about if this patch is really=20 > > needed for modern kernels > > (2.6.7) or modern distributions. Is this patch for the=20 > > server, client or=20 > > both?=20 >=20 > Solaris ACL support is in some kernels but not others. i believe RHEL > 3.0 includes Solaris ACL support for both the NFS client and server, fo= r > example, as an extra patch. stock 2.4 does not. Now I'm confused. Is "Solaris ACL support" something different than the generic ACL patches Andreas provides? > i believe there is a plan to include Solaris NFSv3 ACL support in the > 2.6 client and server at some point in the near future so that everyone > will get the same implementation, and the distributions won't have to > add a separate patch if they need it. That would be great.=20 > the Linux NFSv4 client/server implementation is getting ACL support > right now. there are issues with how to map POSIX ACLs (which Linux Currently, I'm not interested in v4 ACLs.=20 --=20 Peter =C5strand Chief Developer Cendio www.thinlinc.com Teknikringen 3 www.cendio.se 583 30 Link=F6ping Phone: +46-13-21 46 00 _______________________________________________ acl-devel mailing list acl-devel@bestbits.at http://acl.bestbits.at/mailman/listinfo/acl-devel