Re: is setfacl broken? or is it Linux acl support in general?

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

 





On Tue, 30 Aug 2011, Furnish, Trever G wrote:

Can someone help me understand where I'm going wrong with setfacl?

I want every new file created in a directory to have an effective acl of rwx for user "bob".

I do this:
setfacl -m d:u:bob:rwx,u:bob:rwx directory

Then I touch a new file into that directory:
touch directory/newfile

Unfortunately, newfile comes in with some seemingly random acl -- sometimes it's r--, sometimes it's rw-, but it's never rwx.

What gives?

I've tried explicitly setting the default and non-default masks too -- that doesn't seem to help (but here's the command I mean):
setfacl -m d:m::rwx,m::rwx,d:u:bob:rwx,u:bob:rwx .

I've used Linux ACLs for a while .. and I've always issued commands individually. I don't know that this will make a difference for you, but in case it does, it is worth a shot. Try clearing out your ACLs and do them one at a time. Also .. I've used (for a default ACL) setfacl -d -m u:<user>:<perm> .. your format looks a little different. Both could be right .. I've just never tried it your way. Also .. keep in mind that the existing file mask counts.

Barry

--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list


[Index of Archives]     [CentOS]     [Kernel Development]     [PAM]     [Fedora Users]     [Red Hat Development]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Linux Admin]     [Gimp]     [Asterisk PBX]     [Yosemite News]     [Red Hat Crash Utility]


  Powered by Linux