Herbert Poetzl wrote: >>>>
#4043 0 -- 644 0 0 59 0 0 #200 0 -- 584 0 0 83 0 0 #505 0 -- 5148 0 0 274 0 0 #573 0 -- 454248 0 0 33443 0 0 #3009 0 -- 2512 0 0 305 0 0
up to here its context 0 (physical) but no names associated (no entries in /etc/passwd, unusual but possible)
so this means that there are no username -> userid "mappings" in /etc/passwd but the userid's exist somewhere, but noone knows? ;)
ok, now I installed a fresh virtual server on an LVM device. vrsetup is using /dev/vroot/1 for this vserver (I guess using one vroot device per vserver is the way to do it). I copied the patched quota-tools 3.08 to the vserver. right after entering the vserver I ran quotacheck -augvm and quotaon -augv.
I must admit, I've lost the thread ...
no problem. I used your secure LVM how-to to setup everything. http://www.13thfloor.at/VServer/HowTo_LVMQS.shtml (btw there's a missing "/" on line 7 of your LV01.sh)
- for lvm/loop based approach, you would use one vroot device per lvm lv or loop, to block unwanted access and permit quotactl
ok. so for /dev/vg/LV01 and /dev/vg/LV02 I would use two vroot devices (that's what I'm already doing), right?
does the vroot devices have to be used one after one (eg. 0, 1, 2, 3 instead of 0, 1, 4)? I tried to use /dev/vroot/4 (before using vroot devices 1, 2, 3) just so that the vroot device number matches the context number 4 (for convenience).
after adding user "virtual01" it looks like this (two new entries):
User CTX used soft hard grace used soft hard grace --------------------------------------------------------------------------- .... #0 4 -- 2 0 0 2 0 0 #1000 4 -- 4 0 0 3 0 0
#0 4 is root in context 4 (as the patched tools report) #1000 4 is the user with uid 1000 in context 4
if the user with uid 99 in context 10 writes to a file in /path/to/dir (quota enabled) this will natually account for
user #99/10 (in the physical view) but should be reported
as user #99 (in the vserver view, quota & edquota)
so it's correct that there are no usernames in the repquota view, but only userid's?
thanks for your extensive help.
