Hmm, I don't understand how this works. v9fs should issue its own
Tversion and Tattach and discard the previously authenticated session,
right? Or I am missing something?
Thanks,
Lucho
On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 1:34 AM, sqweek<sqw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2009/7/13 Latchesar Ionkov <lu...@ionkov.net>:
>> On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 2:24 AM, sqweek<sqw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Anyway, note that if you auth you'll need supporting software from
>>> p9p also. Factotum and srv -a, in particular, then give v9fs a -o
>>> trans=unix.
>>
>> I don't think that auth is working with v9fs at all. The auth support
>> got dropped accidentally with some of the changes, probably when
>> access=user|any|<uid> was introduced. I.e. my fault.
>
> I didn't realise v9fs ever had auth support. Here is how I've been
> getting an authenticated mount for years:
>
> # create mountpoint
> $ n=$HOME/n
> $ mkdir -p $n/wren
>
> # need factotum running to do the dirty work
> $ factotum
>
> # srv -a posts a pre-authenticated socket in the p9p ns directory
> # wren is my fileserver
> $ srv -a wren
> !adding key: role=client proto=p9sk1 dom=sqweek.dnsdojo.org
> user[sqweek]:
> password:
>
> $ 9mount -i 'unix!/tmp/ns.sqweek.:0/wren' $n/wren
> (or)
> $ mount -t 9p -o uname=sqweek,trans=unix,noextend,dfltuid=$(id
> -u),dfltgid=$(id -g) /tmp/ns.sqweek.:0/wren $n/wren
> # I'm not sure if uname is strictly necessary
>
> $ 9bind $n/wren/home/sqweek/mail $HOME/sqweek/mail
> # various other binds
>
> Jorden mentioned it's a bad idea to let anyone mount anything because
> everyone shares the same namespace. 9mount does have some sanity
> checks for that environment, it will only let you mount over a
> directory you have write access to (and isn't sticky) or is under your
> home dir. Never really been field tested though :)
>
>> Adding the support we had before the access= support is probably easy,
>> but I would like to make it better and support authentication for
>> multiple users. Still no idea what is the correct way. :( Any
>> suggestions are welcome.
>
> Can't help you there - I'm not sure it makes sense to try and put
> factotum's functionality in the linux kernel... Is there some problem
> with the private namespace/individual user mount approach?
> -sqweek
>
>
