On Sat, Oct 12, 2002 at 05:30:26PM +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
> # ==========> what packages are there? Check them
> Fri Aug 23 20:01:11 UTC 2002 astest bash-2.05b-5
> Thu Aug 29 20:56:33 UTC 2002 stripples.devel.redhat.com
> Mon Sep 2 11:21:27 UTC 2002 daffy.perf.redhat.com fileutils-4.1.9-11
> Thu Sep 5 23:12:33 UTC 2002 daffy.perf.redhat.com glibc-2.2.93-5
> Tue Oct 1 18:44:14 UTC 2002 stout.americas.sgi.com attr-2.0.11-0
> Tue Oct 1 18:44:14 UTC 2002 stout.americas.sgi.com attr-devel-2.0.11-0
> Tue Oct 1 18:44:14 UTC 2002 stout.americas.sgi.com libattr-2.0.11-0
> Tue Oct 1 18:45:14 UTC 2002 stout.americas.sgi.com acl-2.0.19-0
> Tue Oct 1 18:45:14 UTC 2002 stout.americas.sgi.com acl-devel-2.0.19-0
> Tue Oct 1 18:45:14 UTC 2002 stout.americas.sgi.com libacl-2.0.19-0
I just found out, that I was using the rpms from
http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/download/cmd_rpms instead of the ones in
1.2pre1. But switching to them does not make any difference.
On Sat, Oct 12, 2002 at 12:43:16PM -0800, Ethan Benson wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 12, 2002 at 05:30:26PM +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
> > The bug seems to be in the acl parts and is not restricted to root
> > XFS-partitions [...]
> yes this is exceedingly annoying since acl aware ls shows such files
> with a + on the permissions, which is erroneous.
> you can see the acls with the following:
> getfattr -m . file
> you will see a system.posix_acl_access attribute (system.* is not
> displayed by default).
I also see a xfsroot.SGI_ACL_FILE entry.
> you can remove them with:
> setfattr -x system.posix_acl_access file
Which also removes the xfsroot.SGI_ACL_FILE entry (as it should, I guess).
> can you try this test by removing the acl with the above setfattr
> command instead of setfacl (which seems to be partly broken in regards
> to acl removal)
Yes, it works as you describe it. Thanks, it works better for restoring my
files then copying them back and forth with non-acl aware tools (like local
So there are three bugs?
a) XFS code should automatically remove ACL attributes if not needed anymore.
b) same for setfacl.
c) files with ACLs appear as executable for root.
If a) is not done in the kernel but in the userland, then maybe a) & b) are
the same bug.