Re: Is NILFS2 suitable for long term archival storage?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Jun 22, 2022 at 11:39 PM Ciprian Craciun wrote:
> On 6/22/22 15:12, Tommy Pettersson wrote:
> > Yet another curiosity I have had to deal with is symlink
> > properties. The standard says that rwx properties of
> > symlinks may be set to anything but should be ignored. All
> > filesystems I have used sets them to 777, except for nilfs2,
> > which honors the current umask value. Now, rsync, which is
> > probably to blame here, tries to update the properties on
> > symlinks, and if it reads from nilfs2, and gets something
> > other than 777, it can not set this other value if the
> > target is not also nilfs2, and will think it has failed. The
> > only workaround I have come up with is to find all symlinks
> > on nilfs2 and update their permission to 777.
>
>
> I've seen this weird behaviour and doesn't bother me.

Ugh, this looks like a bug (or regression).
I will look into what's happening.

Ryusuke Konishi



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux BTRFS]     [Linux CIFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux