Darren J Moffat wrote: > This sounds reasonable to me, I don't see any downsides of doing this. OK. > > I've been thinking recently about a semi related topic. I've been > wondering if there is value in having a set of ZFS filesystem (not > file) properties that gives the min and max labels a file system > should be visible at (maybe it is just one property which is the > label). The idea being that for ZFS we store mountpoints and share > information as properties it seems to make sense that for TX we would > also store the mount label as well.
The mountpoint associated with a ZFS dataset has an implied label based on the zone configuration databases. I think you are suggesting to make this more robust so that we could verify that the label of the mountpoint (as returned by getflabel before mounting the data set) is the same as or dominates the label stored as an attribute of the dataset. --Glenn
