Don't forget we have the upcoming pitch you RFE online meeting. RFEs have not been flooding in and registrations for the pitch meeting are rather thin on the ground...
Simon ________________________________________ From: [email protected] [[email protected]] on behalf of Jonathan Buzzard [[email protected]] Sent: 26 September 2018 18:13 To: gpfsug main discussion list Subject: Re: [gpfsug-discuss] replicating ACLs across GPFS's? On Tue, 2018-09-25 at 17:22 +0000, Bryan Banister wrote: > Thanks Simon, > > I tried out the older patched version of rsync to see if that would > work, but still not able to preserve ACLs from an non-GPFS source. > There was another thread about this on the user group some time ago > as well (2013!), but doesn’t look like any real solution was found > (Copy ACLs from outside sources). > > I’ve also tried tar | tar, but not luck with that either. > > GPFS doesn’t support the nfs4_getacl, nfs4_setfacl, nfs4_editfacl > suite of commands, but maybe that coulnfs4_acl_for_path.d be added?? > Well no they work completely differently. However I did write about this last month. You can do this by modifying just nfs4_acl_for_path.c and nfs4_set_acl.c so they read/write the GPFS ACL struct and convert between the GPFS representation and the internal data structure used by the nfs4-acl-tools to hold NFSv4 ACL's. I have it working for nfs4_getacl. Though this in of itself gets nothing over mmgetacl, other than proving the concept valid. I don't have a test GPFS cluster these days so I need to tread very lightly. However I had some questions that I was hoping someone from IBM might answer but didn't and have been busy since. Namely 1. What's the purpose of a special flag to indicate that it is smbd setting the ACL? Does this tie in with the undocumented "mmchfs -k samba" feature? 2. There is a whole bunch of stuff in the documentation about v4.1 ACL's. How does one trigger that. All I seem to be able to do is get POSIX and v4 ACL's. Do you get v4.1 ACL's if you set the file system to "Samba" ACL's? > I could maybe hack something up that would basically crawl the > “outside source” namespace, using the nfs4_getacl operation get the > NFSv4 ACLs, parse that output, then attempt to use GPFS `mmputacl` to > store the ACL again. This seems like a horrible way to go, likely > prone to mistakes, tough to validate, nightmare to maintain. > I have said it before and will say it again, mmputacl is an abomination that needs to be put down with extreme prejudice. I still think that longer term it would be better to modify FreeBSD's setfacl/getfacl (say renamed to mmsetfacl and mmgetfacl) to do the job, on the basis that they handle both POSIX and NFSv4 ACL's in a single command. Though strictly speaking you only need an mmsetfacl. Perhaps a RFE? JAB. -- Jonathan A. Buzzard Tel: +44141-5483420 HPC System Administrator, ARCHIE-WeSt. University of Strathclyde, John Anderson Building, Glasgow. G4 0NG _______________________________________________ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss _______________________________________________ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
