Re: Would you expect --perms -M--fake-super to set the file mode to the original one?
According to --help: --fake-superstore/recover privileged attrs using xattrs So I would assume which mode it uses when it reads the file, depends on whether this option is on or off. On Monday, March 16, 2020 9:09:36 PM CET, Kevin Korb via rsync wrote: I don't believe it is possible. I think the misunderstanding stems from the fact that the permissions are even stored in the xattr. They don't need to be there but they may as well be. They don't take much space. The real question would be when rsync reads the file to restore it and the file perms are different than the ones in the xattr which set does it use? On 3/16/20 10:01 AM, Dimitrios Apostolou via rsync wrote: Thanks. This is a bit counter-intuitive to me. So how would you tell rsync to store the original permissions in the xattr, but do not touch the real file mode? On Thursday, March 12, 2020 6:26:18 PM CET, Kevin Korb via rsync wrote: ... -- Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing list. To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Re: Would you expect --perms -M--fake-super to set the file mode to the original one?
I don't believe it is possible. I think the misunderstanding stems from the fact that the permissions are even stored in the xattr. They don't need to be there but they may as well be. They don't take much space. The real question would be when rsync reads the file to restore it and the file perms are different than the ones in the xattr which set does it use? On 3/16/20 10:01 AM, Dimitrios Apostolou via rsync wrote: > Thanks. This is a bit counter-intuitive to me. So how would you tell > rsync to store the original permissions in the xattr, but do not touch > the real file mode? > > On Thursday, March 12, 2020 6:26:18 PM CET, Kevin Korb via rsync wrote: >> I would expect that the sending rsync would only send the perms provided >> modified by the --chmod. I wouldn't expect the receiver to even know >> the other permissions. >> >> On 3/12/20 1:23 PM, Dimitrios Apostolou via rsync wrote: >>> Thank you for the feedback, I'm glad to see that different people see >>> the issue >>> differently. As a followup question, what would you expect this to do: >>> >>> rsync --perms --chmod g+rX -M--fake-super src dst >>> >>> I would expect it to store the original permissions in the xattr, >>> while ... >> > > -- ~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._., Kevin Korb Phone:(407) 252-6853 Systems Administrator Internet: FutureQuest, Inc. ke...@futurequest.net (work) Orlando, Floridak...@sanitarium.net (personal) Web page: https://sanitarium.net/ PGP public key available on web site. ~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._., signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing list. To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Re: Would you expect --perms -M--fake-super to set the file mode to the original one?
Thanks. This is a bit counter-intuitive to me. So how would you tell rsync to store the original permissions in the xattr, but do not touch the real file mode? On Thursday, March 12, 2020 6:26:18 PM CET, Kevin Korb via rsync wrote: I would expect that the sending rsync would only send the perms provided modified by the --chmod. I wouldn't expect the receiver to even know the other permissions. On 3/12/20 1:23 PM, Dimitrios Apostolou via rsync wrote: Thank you for the feedback, I'm glad to see that different people see the issue differently. As a followup question, what would you expect this to do: rsync --perms --chmod g+rX -M--fake-super src dst I would expect it to store the original permissions in the xattr, while ... -- Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing list. To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Re: Would you expect --perms -M--fake-super to set the file mode to the original one?
I would expect that the sending rsync would only send the perms provided modified by the --chmod. I wouldn't expect the receiver to even know the other permissions. On 3/12/20 1:23 PM, Dimitrios Apostolou via rsync wrote: > Thank you for the feedback, I'm glad to see that different people see > the issue > differently. As a followup question, what would you expect this to do: > > rsync --perms --chmod g+rX -M--fake-super src dst > > I would expect it to store the original permissions in the xattr, while > modifying the real file mode according to the chmod. > > On Thursday, March 12, 2020 6:06:34 PM CET, Kevin Korb via rsync wrote: >> Permissions don't require super. Any place where permissions can't be >> stored certainly can't handle xattrs either. So, I wouldn't expect >> --fake-super to affect --perms at all. >> >> On 3/12/20 12:46 PM, Dimitrios Apostolou via rsync wrote: >>> rsync --perms -M--fake-super src dst >>> >>> For me, this command means that rsync should save the original perms >>> in the >>> xattr, and leave the real file mode to the umask default. Currently >>> it also >>> modifies the real file mode, and there is no way to store something >>> different ... >> > > -- ~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._., Kevin Korb Phone:(407) 252-6853 Systems Administrator Internet: FutureQuest, Inc. ke...@futurequest.net (work) Orlando, Floridak...@sanitarium.net (personal) Web page: https://sanitarium.net/ PGP public key available on web site. ~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._., signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing list. To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Re: Would you expect --perms -M--fake-super to set the file mode to the original one?
Thank you for the feedback, I'm glad to see that different people see the issue differently. As a followup question, what would you expect this to do: rsync --perms --chmod g+rX -M--fake-super src dst I would expect it to store the original permissions in the xattr, while modifying the real file mode according to the chmod. On Thursday, March 12, 2020 6:06:34 PM CET, Kevin Korb via rsync wrote: Permissions don't require super. Any place where permissions can't be stored certainly can't handle xattrs either. So, I wouldn't expect --fake-super to affect --perms at all. On 3/12/20 12:46 PM, Dimitrios Apostolou via rsync wrote: rsync --perms -M--fake-super src dst For me, this command means that rsync should save the original perms in the xattr, and leave the real file mode to the umask default. Currently it also modifies the real file mode, and there is no way to store something different ... -- Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing list. To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Re: Would you expect --perms -M--fake-super to set the file mode to the original one?
Permissions don't require super. Any place where permissions can't be stored certainly can't handle xattrs either. So, I wouldn't expect --fake-super to affect --perms at all. On 3/12/20 12:46 PM, Dimitrios Apostolou via rsync wrote: > rsync --perms -M--fake-super src dst > > For me, this command means that rsync should save the original perms in the > xattr, and leave the real file mode to the umask default. Currently it also > modifies the real file mode, and there is no way to store something > different > in the xattr. > > According to an old bug report that I found, more people would like > --fake-super to be a complete attribute emulation layer. > > https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7112 > > Do you agree? I'm in the process of implementing this as a bug fix to > rsync, > and would like to know if everybody agrees with this behaviour. The patch > would also modify the man page to document it under --perms. > > > Regards, > Dimitris > > -- ~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._., Kevin Korb Phone:(407) 252-6853 Systems Administrator Internet: FutureQuest, Inc. ke...@futurequest.net (work) Orlando, Floridak...@sanitarium.net (personal) Web page: https://sanitarium.net/ PGP public key available on web site. ~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._., signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing list. To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Would you expect --perms -M--fake-super to set the file mode to the original one?
rsync --perms -M--fake-super src dst For me, this command means that rsync should save the original perms in the xattr, and leave the real file mode to the umask default. Currently it also modifies the real file mode, and there is no way to store something different in the xattr. According to an old bug report that I found, more people would like --fake-super to be a complete attribute emulation layer. https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7112 Do you agree? I'm in the process of implementing this as a bug fix to rsync, and would like to know if everybody agrees with this behaviour. The patch would also modify the man page to document it under --perms. Regards, Dimitris -- Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing list. To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
