Cannot open folders from Macbook after upgrade to Samba 3.4.3

shani wijaya ridgetreeway at
Mon Nov 16 09:34:41 MST 2009

Investigating further I find that the POSIX acl has no effect on the Macbook decision. It seem to be making a local decision that the folders cannot be read instead of trying the operation. 
I learn that Samba now stores the ACL in a  NTFS native format in an extended attribute. When the ACL is read this extended attribute is displayed. Is there anyway to tell samba not to look at the NTFS ACL but get the information from the POSIX ACL? 
This problem happens only to my Macbook client. All other clients are working well.
Thanks in advance

--- On Sat, 11/14/09, shani wijaya <ridgetreeway at> wrote:

From: shani wijaya <ridgetreeway at>
Subject: Cannot open folders from Macbook after upgrade to Samba 3.4.3
To: samba-technical at
Date: Saturday, November 14, 2009, 12:54 PM

I am seeing a weird behavior after upgrading to Samba 3.4.3. I have Netgear NVPro machine which was running samba 3.0.34. I had enabled posix ACLs on the file system and I managed the permissions using get/setfacal etc. It used to work fine. Recently I upgraded the firmware. It seems that the firmware upgrade bumped my samba version to 3.4.3. So here are the symptoms.
I can map a share with to the Macbook running OSX 10.4.6. However I cannot access(read) a folder that has rwx access explicitly set to the user mapping the share. In the same configuration, if I use a linux smbclient or a XP box or a Vista box I can access the share. Only ACL related change I see in the smb.conf is that in the later version (3.4.3) a module with seem to be enabled and loading for the share in question.
If I change the ownership of the file to the user mapping the share, I can access the share. Also the only other way I can seem to open up this folder is if I enable permissions to everyone (o::rwx). So looks like the ACL is spooking the Macos client. This true for many other folders of this nature. I can access the same folder have the same ACL on the 3.0.34 samba version. 
Has anyone experienced this before ? Please let me know your insights.
Thanks in advance


More information about the samba-technical mailing list