straw poll for "veto files" [was Re: "veto files" problem]

[Simo Sorce]

At first I would say no,
but suppose you have an app the create some kind of file the admin want to
preserve at all costs, that are unecessary to users once created...
(Think of some kind of backup or log file...)

I think we should not change the behaviour of veto files, or at least
create a parameter to allow the previous behaviour and put it by default to
no, and let admins know this is changed and that they need to enable this new
parameter if they want the old behaviour.

On Fri, Oct 26, 2001 at 12:04:54PM +1000, Edmund Lam wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 25 Oct 2001, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote:
> 
> > Should a user be able to create files that match the vetoed files
> > for a service?  Currently these files can be created but not accessed.
> > 
>    Short answer - no. Users should not be able to create these vetoed
> files.
> 
>    I'm not a Samba developer, so I have limited clout. But I was extremely
> surprised at this feature -- at the very least, it should be mentioned in 
> smb.conf.
> 
>    I don't think (IMHO) dropboxes (eg incoming/) should be implemented via
> veto files (ie /.?*/*/ right?). Wouldn't a "chmod 333 incoming/" followed
> by something in smb.conf like "force directory mode = 0300" and "directory
> security mask = 0333" be sufficient? Details would vary depending on site
> setup and exact behaviour desired.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Eddie
> 
> 

-- 
Simo Sorce       idra at samba.org
-------------------------------
Samba Team http://www.samba.org