Brandon,
Sorry - lack of sub-text in email. I wasn't really meaning to
rag on IRIX, I've spent my whole tenure here working on it.
I was contrasting it with Solaris because Solaris is doing
what I want it to do and IRIX isn't. The truth is that one
of the great joys of working on unix is that I can say
"this OS is like unix but different" because its true of all
of them. My fallback is to compare it (unix) to VMS...
What I have is an amcheck error when running from "amanda"
account.
I _do not_ have the "nosuid" option set in /etc/fstab.
Should I expect this error when running amcheck on the "amanda server"
which also have /usr/local as a local XFS partition ?
Does it make sense to see this error when the clients are mounting
/usr/local via NFS from the server ? I'd expect different types of
errors there, such as xfsdump failures.
I'd thought at the least the server would run ok.
This is a different issue from a "second amanda server" having
a problem given that the second one NFS mounts /usr/local from
the first on.
One problem at a time though.
thanks,
Brian
> On Mon, 4 Feb 2002, Brian Cuttler wrote:
>
> >Unless, IRIX, unlike Solaris, is stripping the suid bit across the
> >NFS network mount. I mean, this works fine on the Solaris config
> >but is a problem on IRIX.
> >
> >IRIX, like unix only different.
>
> Come on, be fair. IRIX, like _ANY_ unix will strip the suid bit if you
> specify that behavior, which sounds like the case here. Read fstab(4)
> under IRIX for information on the nosuid mount option. If you don't
> desire this security-enhancing behavior just remove the nosuid option
> from your NFS mount.
>
> --
> Brandon D. Valentine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Computer Geek, Center for Structural Biology
>
> "This isn't rocket science -- but it _is_ computer science."
> - Terry Lambert on [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
