Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 22:17:12 -0700 From: Tim Kientzle <tim@kientzle.com> To: =?utf-8?Q?Edward_Tomasz_Napiera=C5=82a?= <trasz@freebsd.org> Cc: "arch@" <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Adapting FreeBSD to PSARC/2010/029. Message-ID: <0C4615AC-7F1F-4486-A431-500535B79B2E@kientzle.com> In-Reply-To: <7CE78D72-F349-443B-A635-8DC7B970C2E0@freebsd.org> References: <7CE78D72-F349-443B-A635-8DC7B970C2E0@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Oct 29, 2010, at 11:44 AM, Edward Tomasz Napiera=C5=82a wrote: > Currently, NFSv4 ACLs support in FreeBSD adheres to a draft by Sam = Falkner > (it also complies with RFC3530, but that one leaves many things = undefined). > Semantics for both UFS and ZFS is exactly the same. With ZFS v28, the > semantics has changed; see the link below for details: >=20 > = http://arc.opensolaris.org/caselog/PSARC/2010/029/20100126_mark.shellenbau= m I guess I need to get back to work on the NFSv4 ACL support for = libarchive, eh? This is great. Together with the acl_is_trivial_np() test function, the = ACL support now makes a lot more sense. The chmod(2) interaction, in particular, is a huge improvement. Tim
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?0C4615AC-7F1F-4486-A431-500535B79B2E>