On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 04:36:18PM -0400, Jim McDonough wrote: > Setting ACLs from an NT4 client, checking the box that says "reset > permission on child objects", everything seems to work fine. I'm using > current SAMBA_2_2. > > Using a 2k client, that same checkbox is named "reset permissions on all > child objects and enable propagation of inheritable permissions", and it > causes the following behavior: for each file/dir in a tree, it propagates > the current permissions from parent to the child (so far so good), but it > does it from the deepest point up, so what we get is: > > /a/b/c/d/e gets /a/b/c/d's current permissions > /a/b/c/d gets /a/b/c's current permissions > /a/b/c gets /a/b's current permissions > /a/b gets /a's current permissions > /a gets set as you said. > > When 2k does this to NT, it all works ok. the 2k client is explicitly > setting everything the way you want. Something is telling him to do it > differently with us. I first suspected ACL revisions, but I did eliminate > that pretty quickly (two lines of change). Any ideas here?
So when a W2K client does this to a NT server, what pattern of ACL set operations gets done ? Jeremy.
