Re: SFU3.5 and getting permissions to work

i can't figure out how to do that.
have you done it?


On Sat, 09 Apr 2005 14:00:10 +1200, Enkidu <enkidu.com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

>
>Don't do mapping? You *have* to map at least one user or
>group, don't you, to determine who has access to the files.
>I guess you could map the Everyone group to the root user.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Clifff
>
>BobMarley wrote:
>> We don't do mapping.
>> i seem to remember never having to do it before...
>> I was wondering if this was a new security feature in 3.0 or 3.5
>>
>> what i'd love to do is have the file created by the unix host, be
>> available as EVERYONE with full control.
>>
>> any idea how i can do that?
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 08 Apr 2005 09:23:06 +1200, Enkidu <enkidu.com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>BobMarley wrote:
>>>
>>>>I have a unix server connecting to an NFS mount point on my
>>>>Windows Server. Whenever a file is written there by the unix server,
>>>>it typically comes across as having permissions only of SYSTEM and
>>>>read. So no one is ever able to access the file
>>>>
>>>> How can i have it come across so that it is a file readable by
>>>>Windows users? I thought it did that by default in earlier versions,
>>>>but maybe 3.5 changed that?
>>>>
>>>
>>>We use SFU 3.0 and it a major pain in the ... neck! When you
>>>add a file or change permissions on the Unix it creates a
>>>new Windows ACL. This means that all users/groups with
>>>permissions on that directory and the files in it become
>>>inaccessible on the Windows for almost all users. The new
>>>acl seems to wipe all existing acls and since it is
>>>theoretically inherited (don't know why) all you see in the
>>>permissions is grey blank boxes which you can't change.
>>>
>>>What we have to do periodically is take ownership of the
>>>directory and all sub-directories and files and set the
>>>permissions back again.
>>>
>>>Though having said that, have you checked the mapping
>>>between Windows users and groups and Unix users and groups?
>>>


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Linux/Samba w/ multiple users
    ... > using the machine name for one mapping and the IP for the other, ... > can't map both; and I can't map to the same Linux machine even if I use ... > I know nothing about Linux. ... having permissions to a share doesn't mean you have permissions to the ...
    (comp.os.linux)
  • Re: Decoding strategy
    ... Mapping is actually two-step process, ... address at which to map the file, this isn't necessary, nor does it to my ... needs physical RAM that's not available). ... This doesn't reserve any ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp)
  • behavior as mapping
    ... seeing behavior as a mapping from a very high dimension ... that the map has been changed. ... The brain has a finite and relatively fixed number of neurons, ... But in fact, before we learned how to ride a bike, ...
    (comp.ai.philosophy)
  • Re: Binary Tree and Pairs of Nodes
    ... Every node in your infinite binary tree occurs at the ... So you say you have a mapping of every path to a node. ... You do not map My path to 1, because whichEVER path YOU mapped to 1, ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: MVC - Model binding to collection
    ... If you use ViewPage, you have a more explicit way of defining your model so you can drill through more explicitly. ... I am creating the view without problem, but my expectation is that I can create a textbox with a name which will enable the defaultmodelbinder to map back the post variables to the model. ... I'm sure that my model could be a little simpler, although I would still have Contact Data as a collection and it is complicated a little because of the linqtosql mapping. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.aspnet)
Loading