> Anton B. Rang wrote: > > I'd filed 6452505 (zfs create should set permissions on underlying > > mountpoint) so that this shouldn't cause problems in the future.... > > Err.. the way you have described that, seems backward to me, and violates > existing expected known solaris behaviour, not to mention logical separation > of filesystems. > zfs should not go changing the permissions on the [presumably] ufs directory > underneath it. Yuck!
Perhaps the way the synopsis is phrased is ambiguous, but I understood the issue to be with mountpoints that ZFS creates for you, not for existing mountpoints. At least that's the example in the report. > how about, "operations on zfs filesystems should ignore permissions of the > underlying mount point"? As referred to in the synopsis: 4697677. > (although maybe this has to be "fixed" at the vfs level. But if so... Good! > it's only about 10 years overdue...) True. -- Darren Dunham [EMAIL PROTECTED] Senior Technical Consultant TAOS http://www.taos.com/ Got some Dr Pepper? San Francisco, CA bay area < This line left intentionally blank to confuse you. > _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
