[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f158dc670709130751s2f6046beje5401ec6c56051dd@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 08:51:21 -0600
From: "Latchesar Ionkov" <lucho@...kov.net>
To: "Eric Van Hensbergen" <ericvh@...il.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, v9fs-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] 9p: rename uid and gid parameters
Zero was the value that was used before, even though it wasn't defined
explicitly. I just defined a macro so we can see and eventually change
it to something better. I don't know if there is a good default value.
Is nfsnobody the same on all Linux distributions?
Thanks,
Lucho
On 9/13/07, Eric Van Hensbergen <ericvh@...il.com> wrote:
> On 9/12/07, Latchesar Ionkov <lucho@...kov.net> wrote:
> > Change the names of 'uid' and 'gid' parameters to the more appropriate
> > 'dfltuid' and 'dfltgid'.
> >
>
> ...
>
> > strcpy(v9ses->name, V9FS_DEFUSER);
> > strcpy(v9ses->remotename, V9FS_DEFANAME);
> > + v9ses->dfltuid = V9FS_DEFUID;
> > + v9ses->dfltgid = V9FS_DEFGID;
> >
> ...
> > +#define V9FS_DEFUID (0)
> > +#define V9FS_DEFGID (0)
>
> I'm not sure if there is a good solution here, but I'm uncomfortable
> with using uid=0 as the default. I'm not sure if there is a default
> uid for nobody, but anything is probably better than 0. Looks like
> nfsnobody is 65534, we could use that - even if only as a marker for
> the server to map it to nobody on the target system? What do you
> think?
>
> Particularly with attach-per-user, we probably need to look at
> interacting with idmapd or create our own variant real soon.
>
> -eric
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists