[Pkg-samba-maint] Bug#833869: Bug#833869: samba: Samba file permissions and "unix extensions = yes"

[Folkert Muller]

replying again for inclusion of the 833869 at bugs.debian.org cc

2016-08-09 19:24 GMT+02:00 Folkert Muller <folkertmuller at gmail.com>:

> The permissions were 644 in the case I found, and 755 when I tested it
> myself.
> In the first case I only have seen the result on the server, in the second
> case the rights on the client and server where the same. When I created a
> new file (with thunar on a folder mounted on this server) the permissions
> were 664 as expected.
>
> I expected the "force create mode = 0664" its brother "create mask = 0664"
> to overrule permissions when copying to the server.
>
> Maybe I just didn't understand "unix extensions" would overwrite the above
> options.
>
> I use 664 on one big share, and have the base folder set so nobody can
> edit it, the rights on the next folders are drwxrxs--- or drwxrwsr-x with
> the groups corresponding to who may edit.
>
> Cheers to you as well, it's 19:13 here in the netherlands and I am
> drinking the australian chardonnay "willowglen". I hope you are enjoying
> yourself as well.
>
> Greetings, Folkert
>
> 2016-08-09 18:57 GMT+02:00 Jelmer Vernooij <jelmer at debian.org>:
>
>> severity 833869 wishlist
>> thanks
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 09, 2016 at 06:46:48PM +0200, folkert wrote:
>> > I found out a user put a file on the server and another user from the
>> same group
>> > not beeing able to edit it. Both users using a debian stable client.
>> What were the permissions/owner/group of the file after being copied by
>> the
>> first user?
>>
>> This sounds like regular unix behaviour.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Jelmer
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-samba-maint/attachments/20160809/5a46a01a/attachment.html>