Eric / Nathan,
I guess I'm just totally confused, and I thought I was following this subject
I understood the below to be true (but apparently I'm wrong):
The 2.5 kernel had syscalls added to it to support EAs in general.
These syscalls were back ported to the 2.4 kernel and released as a standard
part of 2.4.18.
These new EA syscalls are being used by the user tools to implement ACLs.
Shortly after the release of 2.4.18, a new set of XFS kernel patches were
released that allowed the new syscalls to be compatible with XFS. This did not
impact on the on-disk format. The xfs acl user tools for manipulating ACLs
became broken at this point. i.e. the old kernel entry points that the xfs acl
user tools depended on were no longer provided by the XFS patches.
The acl.bestbits user tools were upgraded to support these new syscalls.
Therefore these tools work with XFS on a 2.4.18 kernel.
Due to the fact that XFS and acl.bestbits now share a common kernel API for ACL
support, the previous xfs-user tools for manipulating ACLs have been retired,
and the upgraded acl.bestbit tools are now used instead.
The libacl.so library from acl.bestbits has also been upgraded to use the new
Therefore, programs like Samba 2.2.3a that use the libacl.so package to access
ACLs automatically support the new syscalls by simply upgrading the libacl.so
library to a current version.
If someone could please clarify the above, I would appreciate it.
In particular statements that the 2.4.18 kernel does not have ACL support yet
seems totally contradictory to the above.
Deployment and Integration Specialist
The Norcross Group
>> On Mon, 2002-04-15 at 11:34, Greg Freemyer wrote:
>> > I just posted the below comment to Simon's report, and got the below
>> surprising reply.
>> > If the reply is in error, I suggest someone with a better knowledge of
>> this than I should post a follow on comment.
>> > =========
>> > The reply was:
>> > ==
>> > sorry but 2.4 doesn't have the ACL interface yet and in 2.5 it's still
>> > immature (eg not set in stone)
>> While the syscalls have been reserved in 2.5 (and will probably be added
>> to 2.4 Real Soon Now), I think there is still some wiggle room in the
>> actual API. Perhaps Nathan can chime in when he gets to work, as this
>> is his baby...
>> Eric Sandeen XFS for Linux http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs
>> sandeen@xxxxxxx SGI, Inc.