From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Apr 12 10:42:38 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1EB016A509 for ; Thu, 12 Apr 2007 10:42:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org) Received: from cyrus.watson.org (cyrus.watson.org [209.31.154.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AFEE13C483 for ; Thu, 12 Apr 2007 10:42:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org) Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [209.31.154.41]) by cyrus.watson.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC7DA47961; Thu, 12 Apr 2007 06:42:37 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2007 11:42:37 +0100 (BST) From: Robert Watson X-X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: ticso@cicely.de In-Reply-To: <20070412021645.GQ30772@cicely12.cicely.de> Message-ID: <20070412114135.C64803@fledge.watson.org> References: <200704112004.03903.lists@jnielsen.net> <20070412021645.GQ30772@cicely12.cicely.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: John Nielsen , current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ZFS to support chflags? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2007 10:42:38 -0000 On Thu, 12 Apr 2007, Bernd Walter wrote: > On Wed, Apr 11, 2007 at 08:04:03PM -0400, John Nielsen wrote: > >> I just moved /usr over to a zpool on my -CURRENT system. Performance and >> stability are both excellent so far. (Thanks Pawel!) However I noticed that >> setting FS flags on files with chflags is not supported. Would it be >> feasible to add support for flags on ZFS, and if so are there plans to do >> so? >> >> If not (and/or in the meantime), are there any places in the base system >> where flags are required for normal operation? (/var maybe?) > > Some binaries have such flags set, but it is not required, otherwise > diskless NFS wouldn't work. I often see installworld warnings about beeing > unable to set extended flags on ld.so and others on my diskless boxes. I'm not a big fan of setting these flags -- I fairly frequently run into problems when I installworld an NFS root on the NFS host, then try to work with it over NFS from the NFS-booted system, as the flags can't be removed via NFS. They don't offer a security benefit as-installed, and perhaps offer a benefit with respect to preventing people from shooting themselves in the foot (or perhaps not). Robert N M Watson Computer Laboratory University of Cambridge