[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Security? Re: Somebody build python2 for unstable (please, please!)

> > Hmmm... or just use another network filesystem. There's something called
> > "CODA", but I've not seen it yet. And how about SMB?
> Uhm, only tried with a NT4 host. Doesn't work either. NT4 is not able to use
> symlinks (whereas the underlying NTFS is capable of that, but not the Win32
> API).
> Never tried CODA. May be you want to try and to report? ;-)) 

I doubt SMB would work for building packages, since file permissions and
names can be mangled (everything is 0755 by default and names are case
insensitive).  You probably don't want Coda, or its parent, AFS - neither
one really respects UNIX group permissions.  Instead ACLs are used to
enforce things, along with Kerberos for user authentication.  While it might
be possible, getting these things running is a pain.  It took me over a week
to get AFS running (but then, I may just be dim :-) and Coda looks to be a
similar mess...

> > No need to stick to the outdated security strainer that NFS is...

NFSv4 is _much_ better.  Of course, it's only a draft standard, and isn't
really implemented fully in Solaris yet (let alone Linux)...

> Depends on... but NFS under Linux seems to be very crappy, anyway... 
> I never had such problems with NFS on SGIs, only on Linux... d'oh!

NFS under Linux is very, very fragile, especially when automounted.  Someone
really should clean things up...  Any kernel hackers out there interested?

Mike Shuey

Reply to: