Control: tags -1 + upstream moreinfo Le jeu. 28 juin 2018 à 03:00, Josip Rodin <j...@debbugs.entuzijast.net> a écrit : > > On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 09:51:03PM +0000, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote: > > Closing as this is not a bug but a configuration tuning. > > Sorry, what? I don't see such an explanation in the bug log.
"unix extensions = no" fixes your problem, isn't it? > Two people said "unix extensions = no" would work around the issue. > Nobody provided an actual solution to the issue. This is not a workaround, this is a solution. Otherwise MacOS X uses "chmod" (an UNIX extension), and nothing prevents it server-side. > Nobody responded to the part where I said: > > > I had specified all documented options that describe native Linux permission > > masks to be applied on files on Samba shares. The daemon ignored this > > because of another implicit option being in effect, one which contradicted > > those other, explicit settings. Please tell exactly which options your are talking about. > That just doesn't make sense from a user > > standpoint, regardless of the rationale. A proper bug fix would be to change > > the behaviour of that new option to take into account the requirements set > > by old options (better), or to fully document the impact of the new option > > and make it explicit (worse, but still satisfactory). Please tell exactly which options your are talking about. > Can you? The "create mask" doesn't impact the chmod UNIX extension. And nothing prevents this chmod except "unix extensions = no" or insufficient perms (i.e. local UNIX permissions as if you runt chmod locally). Regards -- Mathieu Parent
