Hi Ross, I think there's a misunderstanding about the question that I brought up. I don't have any problems with setting share properties via zfs and it's a reasonable thing to do because you're sharing out a file system.
The reason that I asked the question was that in my view enabling/disabling guest access is a CIFS service property and not a share property, although it could be implemented as a share property. Afshin Ross wrote: > Hi Afshin, > > Well, this conversation got a little out of control, but I'd just like to > chip in to explain that setting share options via the filesystem is for me > one of the major benefits of ZFS. > > I configure both NFS and CIFS sharing via the ZFS commands, setting share > names, read & write access, & configuring root access. The advantage of > doing it that way is that all the settings are a property of the pool. It > means my settings are protected almost as well as my data, and both disaster > recovery and maintenance are a piece of cake. > > I've already tested disaster recovery by doing a send/receive to a second > server and bringing the pool online. Those two simple steps were enough to > recover all my data, permissions, and shares. The only extra step I'd have > needed for a true recovery would have been to rename the server. > > Ross > > PS. I'm with the Sun guys about the rest of this thread. Setting up > authentication is not exactly hard and Microsoft themselves disable guest > access. I'm happily using CIFS on my home network with Windows and Linux > clients, and a girlfriend who hasn't a clue about authentication using it > with no problems. _______________________________________________ cifs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/cifs-discuss
