So if you don't see any problems with this solution, I'll give it a try on the first chance that I have and update.
Thanks for help and prompt replies! David On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 2:47 PM, Volker Lendecke <volker.lende...@sernet.de>wrote: > On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 02:37:09PM +0300, David wrote: > > Thanks for all your help and I'm sorry if I'm being a nag, but I have to > > check all my options before moving on using nfsv4 authorization. > > I quickly setup a test server with the same configuration like on my prod > > environment, and I found that if remove gpfs module from the "vfs object" > > option line, I can see the permissions and get the proper permissions > from > > the acls entries. (just like in example I sent at the begging) > > > > If this resolves my problem, is there a reason why not using this > solution? > > It also don't come up with what you wrote before which totally make sense > to > > me... > > I never used GPFS with posix ACLs, and I *thought* from the > mere existence of the special ACL API in gpfs.h that these > calls are required. > > If it works fine now, perfect. Sorry for the noise, just > ignore me. > > Volker > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) > > iEYEARECAAYFAkpdwe4ACgkQbsgDfmnSbrb4jwCggx7+RqxCcQjBk9ZWpjLBHdlD > +wgAnj8Xg6yZdBvXAo4tbWs6bcHZK6Ol > =wKTS > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
