[gpfsug-discuss] DACLs and nfs4-acl-tools

[Jonathan Buzzard]

On 26/02/2024 18:16, Jan-Frode Myklebust wrote:

> It’s not just the nfs4_setfacl tool. Also cp and rsync will fail to cooy 
> such ACLs.
> 
> I have an RFE for this :
> 
> https://ideas.ibm.com/ideas/GPFS-I-986 
> <https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fideas.ibm.com%2Fideas%2FGPFS-I-986&data=05%7C02%7Cjonathan.buzzard%40strath.ac.uk%7C13dbdc56c38c4236cfe508dc36f789c4%7C631e0763153347eba5cd0457bee5944e%7C0%7C0%7C638445684027108564%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=lu5eSEI751NFgfUM9BaK4Vd4ao1ZasMTynvxXsB%2FLlU%3D&reserved=0>
> 
> 

At this point in time requests for being able to recursively set NFSv4 
ACL's on GPFS are over 12 years old. At least that would be about the 
time frame for requests for the feature made by myself.

Unfortunately I think the chances of IBM doing anything about it is 
somewhere around ħ

Shame really as it would not be particularly hard to do. I have an old 
proof of concept that uses the FreeBSD tool (mainly of licensing 
reasons). Basically it transforms the GPFS ACL to the storage format 
used by the FreeBSD tool. Just needs refactoring to use the GPFS ACL 
storage format throughout. Probably about a weeks developer effort.

There are some poorly publicly documented features of the GPFS ACL 
format that make me reluctant to release my code in case it chews 
someone's filesystem.


JAB.

-- 
Jonathan A. Buzzard                         Tel: +44141-5483420
HPC System Administrator, ARCHIE-WeSt.
University of Strathclyde, John Anderson Building, Glasgow. G4 0NG