[Samba] difference between samba running on solaris 10 and centos 5.5
gaiseric.vandal at gmail.com
Fri Apr 1 06:46:38 MDT 2011
I believe ZFS uses "NFSv4" Acl's while Ext3 (or UFS) uses Posix.
Supposedly the NFSv4 ACL's are closer to Windows. My experience was
that ZFS gave more headaches than UFS in conjunction with Samba- with
ZFS a perm such as "660" (i.e. user and group can read and write, but
not rights to anyone ELSE) sometimes got interpreted by Samba as
"everyone is denied" which trumped the user and group "allow" ACE's.
What does getfacl show on the file?
What do you see for the permissions and effective permissions under
Windows? Are there "Deny" ACE's? Does windows complain about
permissions being ordered incorrectly?
I believe that Centos 5.x/RHEL5.x DOES enabled ACL's on Ext3 file
systems by default.
On 03/31/2011 11:16 PM, Jeremy Allison wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 01, 2011 at 12:05:03PM +1000, Jason Wise wrote:
>> I have recently switch from Solaris 10 with ZFS filesystem to CentOS 5.5
>> with ext3 filesystem. I am now getting "access denied" errors randomly
>> in windows. What I would like to know is, what are the difference's
>> between solaris and linux that may cause this?
> They have different ACL models. We'd need to see level 10 logs
> containing these errors to be able to tell what is going on.
More information about the samba