David Walser wrote: > Martin Fahrendorf wrote: > >> This seems to be a thing for samba with acl. If you are using ext3 or >> xfs you can simply change/add acls to the files and directorys and you >> can give permissions similar to windows nt (a group/person can read, >> others can write and others can execute). > > > Yeah he had tried ACL before (I thought it was capable of this), but was > much happier with trustees for some reason. >
Maybe because he did not know about default ACLs (setfacl -D). It does not seem as if trustees have more rights than posix ACLs (things like modify, full control etc that are available on windows). But trustees are more netware-ish, ACLs more window-ish, but the thing with ACLs is that you can manipulate them easily from a windows machine (either nt/2k/xp pro native or win9x with some additional software). The explanation of why trustees are better than ACLs on this site: http://trustees.sourceforge.net/ is thus incorrect. Setting ACLs from windows will AFAIK by default set default ACLs, so his argument that there is no easy way to set ACLs through the system is incorrect. But I still wander if there are any advantages to trustees? Buchan -- |--------------Another happy Mandrake Club member--------------| Buchan Milne Mechanical Engineer, Network Manager Cellphone * Work +27 82 472 2231 * +27 21 8828820x121 Stellenbosch Automotive Engineering http://www.cae.co.za GPG Key http://ranger.dnsalias.com/bgmilne.asc 1024D/60D204A7 2919 E232 5610 A038 87B1 72D6 AC92 BA50 60D2 04A7
