On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 11:38:43AM +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote: > On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 10:23 PM, J. Bruce Fields <bfields@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > The following patches allow the umask to be ignored in the presence of > > inheritable NFSv4 ACLs. Otherwise inheritable ACLs can be rendered > > mostly useless whenever the umask masks out group bits. > > > > This solves a problem we've seen complaints about for some time, both > > upstream and from RHEL users. > > > > The new protocol has been discussed in the IETF working group and is > > documented at: > > > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-nfsv4-umask-02 > > > > It's unlikely that we'll discover problems requiring an incompatible > > change, so I think we should consider this for 4.10. > > Nope, these patches don't implement draft-ietf-nfsv4-umask-02 yet, They don't? What did I miss? --b. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
