Forgive me ignorance. Would the same situation happens
in say SMB/CIFS ? To the server, the authentication
would still be whoever mount it from the client side.
I don't think this is a bug(if it is at all) worth RC status.
__
Do you Yahoo!?
On Wed, May 25, 2005 at 11:12:04PM -0700, gary ng wrote:
Forgive me ignorance. Would the same situation happens
in say SMB/CIFS ? To the server, the authentication
would still be whoever mount it from the client side.
I don't think this is a bug(if it is at all) worth RC status.
SMB/CIFS
also sprach gary ng [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005.05.26.0812 +0200]:
Forgive me ignorance. Would the same situation happens
in say SMB/CIFS ? To the server, the authentication
would still be whoever mount it from the client side.
If I mount a SMB/CIFS share with umask 0700, nobody but myself can
Hi,
Disclaimer: I don't know davfs2 and I don't use. But I disgree that every
file system should implement POSIX access semantics. There are production
class systems that don't, e.g. the Andrew file system. And as Coda, which
according to the package description is used as the backend, is a
also sprach Moritz Muehlenhoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005.05.26.0109 +0200]:
Disclaimer: I don't know davfs2 and I don't use. But I disgree
that every file system should implement POSIX access semantics.
There are production class systems that don't, e.g. the Andrew
file system. And as Coda,
On Thu, May 26, 2005 at 02:40:19AM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach Moritz Muehlenhoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005.05.26.0109 +0200]:
Disclaimer: I don't know davfs2 and I don't use. But I disgree
that every file system should implement POSIX access semantics.
There are production
6 matches
Mail list logo
