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

Re: alternatives to NIS and NFS



On Mon, 2004-08-02 at 23:31 -0400, Mark Roach wrote:
> On Tue, 2004-08-03 at 15:14 +1200, Paul William wrote:
> > > Samba's not a goer. Doesn't do Unix permissions. It's a Windows/OS/2 
> > > sharing scheme.
> 
> > what about http://uranus.it.swin.edu.au/~jn/linux/smbfs/ . smbfs with 
> > unix extentions?
> 
> Recent versions of samba and linux support cifs and unix extensions
> which do all the normal unixy sorts of things WRT permissions as well as
> supporting acls and soft + hard links. You just mount the remote system
> with "mount -t cifs //server/share /mount/point -o user=username"

Hmmm, upon playing with this a little further... it seems that a share
mounted with cifs *shows* the correct file permissions, but treats every
user on the system as the person who mounted the share. for example:

# mount.cifs //192.168.150.101/testfsmp /tmp/testfsmp/ -o user=mrroach
# ls -ld /tmp/testfsmp/testdir/
drwxrwxr-x    2 root     root            0 2004-08-06 02:38 /tmp/testfsmp/testdir/
# su guest
$ touch /tmp/testfsmp/testdir/should_give_an_error
$ ls -l /tmp/testfsmp/testdir/should_give_an_error
-rw-r--r--    1 mrroach  mrroach         0 2004-08-03 00:07 /tmp/testfsmp/testdir/should_give_an_error

Weird, huh? So, looks like that option is no good. That's a disappointment.

-Mark




Reply to: