Hi,

I've a question about aufs: I want to create a FS-Tree with one rw and  
one ro branch (simple setup). Thats not the problem but I want to wrap  
all permissions while mount to uid=100 (some_user) and gid=100  
(users). Is there any possibility to do that?

For better understanding of my problem I will point out the context:
I want to realize a kind of "template" for my Users Homedirs. The  
Template contains very much big files and it isn't a good idea to copy  
all files for each user. The use of symbolic-links isn't a good idea  
too because you can't change the content of a file transparently in  
applications. So I decided to use some kind of unification-filesystem  
and now testing aufs in my setup.

The read-only branch contains some files and is owned by root:users  
and has 750 permissions.
The rw-Branch is owned by some_user:users and has 700 permissions.
Now I do the aufs-mount.
Because the permissions at the read-only branch are at 750 and  
root:users, I get this permission for every file and folder at the  
aufs-mount expect the "." where the permissions of the rw-branch are  
taken.

I don't suppose that this behavior is a bug, but I havn't find any  
solution for this. I my case it's necessary that the users can change  
to content of their own homedirs. For SSHFS/Fuse its possible to set a  
uid and gid at mount-time.

When I do a chown of the aufs mount point all data will be copied up,  
thats no good solution as you can imagine ;-).

Is there any possibilty to do something with aufs? Or is there any  
better tool out there that satisfy my needs?

Thanks in advance,

regards,
Peter Hansen


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Open Source Business Conference (OSBC), March 24-25, 2009, San Francisco, CA
-OSBC tackles the biggest issue in open source: Open Sourcing the Enterprise
-Strategies to boost innovation and cut costs with open source participation
-Receive a $600 discount off the registration fee with the source code: SFAD
http://p.sf.net/sfu/XcvMzF8H

Reply via email to