Samba on Linux with no ACL's is making things tough
michaelm at voicerite.com
Sun Apr 2 22:23:13 GMT 2000
Actually putting SAMBA on a Solaris, HP-UX or SGI box defeats the purpose
of me using SAMBA in the first place (lower cost). I fully understand
that this is not the teams fault. I just cannot believe that nobody has
found a way to function in a complex sharing environment with Linux and
Samba. It leads me to think that Samba is only good for two situtions, 1)
When you have a UNIX OS with ACL's in the underlying file system or 2) if
you have very unsophisticated file storage setup. Given this Samba on
Linux only has one purpose and it sure is not the more attractive of the
two. I cannot wait for the new filesystems to mature. Guess it is back to
If anybody is wondering what we are talking about please see my first
message. It is long but I feel it is important and I think many people
come across this.
7725 NW 48th St.
Miami, Florida 33166
Phone / Fax / Pager : 305 436 1574
On Sun, 2 Apr 2000, David Collier-Brown - Sun Canada wrote:
> Well, you just described the problems that ACLs on Multics were
> designed to solve, and one which Unix perms didn't attempt to
> address. Darn!
> Can you put an smb server on a machine with ACLs? Solaris, HP-UX
> and SGI at least have POSIX ACLs, which will suffice. The team
> is aware of the problem, but can't do much if the underlying OS
> doesn't have the functionality...
> David Collier-Brown in Boston
> Phone: (781) 442-0734, Room BUR03-3632
More information about the samba