Sorry sir, but technically it is the sgid bit that is a gross hack.
The Posix draft for ACLs never got final approval, but it is pretty
standardized across most OSs, and works fine for any Linux OS that isn;t
on ancient kernels. It is also enabled by default on all file systems
that matter normall
On Fri, 2012-10-26 at 09:36 +0200, Ondrej Valousek wrote:
> Well, you do not need ACLs for that, just 'chmod g+s ' will
> do.
This is what makes people ask for changing the GID, which is suboptimal
on many accounts.
The reason why FreeIPA creates a User Private Group is that the default
umask pre
On 10/25/2012 08:33 PM, Steven Jones wrote:
I hadnt restarted but now I have, no difference.
wc -l says 1 but every other line is a blank, so yes 5000 seems likely.
There are just under 6000 AD users2 servers as this is in the test
environment to test winsync and passyncboth are wo
hi,
yes, you are correct :-). Being a recent nfsv4 acls fan has made me forget that.
--
Groeten,
natxo
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 9:36 AM, Ondrej Valousek wrote:
> Well, you do not need ACLs for that, just 'chmod g+s ' will do.
> But in general, I agree, this is insane requirement as nobody would
Well, you do not need ACLs for that, just 'chmod g+s ' will do.
But in general, I agree, this is insane requirement as nobody would ever think of it in Windows. Not happy w/ a traditional Unix
permissions? Go for ACLs.
The only pity is that the current Posix-draft hack widely used on all Linuxes
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 9:11 PM, KodaK wrote:
> We have many different development groups, but people can be members
> of multiple groups. For collaboration, they'd like it when creating a
> file to have that file have a group ownership of "foo" on machine-A,
> but "bar" on machine-B. I'd like
