:o) Now Im a bit confused. You write here that 744 should suffice for my needs even with CIFS, but one post below you write that 744 doesnt suffice with CIFS: "This works for local/NFS access but it might not work quite perfectly for CIFS access since Unix '7' does not translate to Windows 'full-control'. Also '4' might not exactly map to Windows 'Read'"
If I look at the timestamp it seems that "744 should suffice" is newest, and that statement is the one that is valid? PS. Regarding 744, it sets everything to rwx r-- r-- But if I want others to be able to search in directories, I must set the "x" bit also? Is this correct? Like: rwx r-x r-x So the files must be "rwx r-- r--" and the directories "rwx r-x r-x" So I must treat the directories separately from the files? PSS. One last question, you wrote that only using 744 could mess CIFS up, because "4 might not map to Windows Read". If I wanted to use ACL, which ACE permissions should I use instead? PSSS. FATMAN, great you solved your problem! If you have time, maybe you could recap the problem and the solution, briefly at the end? I always do that when I have a question. A recap is good for future use. In fact, it should be publicly announced that "when you started a thread, conclude the problem and a solution with a brief recap at the very end". I personally hate when someone asks a question and writes "solved it, thanks". It annoys me. How did he solve it? I want a brief recap of the problem and the solution at the end, like an "abstract". Then I can read the whole thread and learn the details. Future database with Q&A. Dont you like this suggestion? -- This message posted from opensolaris.org _______________________________________________ cifs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/cifs-discuss
