On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 5:14 PM Björn JACKE <bj@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 2023-05-25 at 13:22 -0700 Jeremy Allison sent off: > > I think cifsfs providing access to ADS remotely on Windows > > and Samba shares is fine. > > > > What I'm scared of is adding ADS as a generic "feature" to > > the Linux VFS and other filesystems :-). > > full ack on Jeremy's view here. > > If there is something the the Linux VFS layer should *really* add to help > interoperability with basically all other major OS implementations is NFSv4 > ACLs. Seriously, for so many people living with Linux is a real pain due to > the lack of NFS4 ACLs here. Today the "RichACLs" can be displayed multiple ways (e.g. "getcifsacl" and various other tools and also via system xattrs). Being able to display "RichACLs" makes sense - and I am fine with mapping these (and probably would make sense to at least have a readonly mapping of the existing richacls on a file to "posixacl") and RichACLs are very important. Wouldn't it be easier to let them also be queried for cifs.ko via "system.getrichacl" (or whatever the "getrichacl" tool used in various xfstests uses)? I was also wondering how we should display (and how to retrieve via SMB3) "claims based ACLs" (presumably these are reasonably common on a few server types like Windows)? -- Thanks, Steve
