From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Aug 19 17:56:21 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6CAD106566C; Sun, 19 Aug 2012 17:56:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pavel.priv@hte.vl.net.ua) Received: from relay.hte.vl.net.ua (relay.hte.vl.net.ua [81.17.132.178]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A2708FC1C; Sun, 19 Aug 2012 17:56:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from filter (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by relay.hte.vl.net.ua (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EAAC1713521; Sun, 19 Aug 2012 20:56:14 +0300 (EEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at hte.vl.net.ua Received: from relay.hte.vl.net.ua ([127.0.0.1]) by filter (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zUhtuBZfpgKk; Sun, 19 Aug 2012 20:56:13 +0300 (EEST) Received: from [192.168.4.254] (unknown [192.168.4.254]) by relay.hte.vl.net.ua (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 16EBA1713528; Sun, 19 Aug 2012 20:56:12 +0300 (EEST) Message-ID: <503128BB.6040801@hte.vl.net.ua> Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2012 20:56:11 +0300 From: Pavel Bychykhin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120713 Thunderbird/14.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: =?UTF-8?B?RWR3YXJkIFRvbWFzeiBOYXBpZXJhxYJh?= References: <502FD583.9070105@hte.vl.net.ua> <06453437-D034-41C2-8B7F-15B228AD2532@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <06453437-D034-41C2-8B7F-15B228AD2532@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Some of ZFS ACLs doesn't work as expected X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2012 17:56:21 -0000 19.08.2012 19:40, Edward Tomasz Napierała пишет: > Wiadomość napisana przez Pavel Bychykhin w dniu 18 sie 2012, o godz. 19:48: >> Dear community! >> >> After my experiments with ZFS, I concluded, that permissions "delete_child" and "delete" are ignored. >> For the create/update/delete operation a list of "rwxp" (read_data/write_data/execute/append_data) is fully sufficient. > > They are not ignored, but yes, write access on a directory is enough to delete a file. > >> No need to specify the "delete_child" and "delete" permissions at all, or I don't understand something? > > Unless you need them - no, you don't. That's why these bits are not set in a default > case (so called 'trivial ACL', i.e. no ACL set on a file). > Could you please provide an example of at least one practical situation, where the "delete_child" and "delete" permissions would be useful? -- Best regards, Pavel