On 2/5/07, Jeremy Allison <jra@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mon, Feb 05, 2007 at 10:44:05AM +0000, Anders Karlsson wrote:
> Hi there,
> During testing, it has been noted that the CIFS client does not seem to
> honour the umask
This all depends on what you have set as "create mask" etc.
on the server.
Even with create mask set to 7777 and security mask set to 0000, umask
is being ignored. Stracing the testcase when running it on a ext3 filesystem
and then on the mounted share show that the open() calls are identical.
I know the Server enforces permissions, but the files on the share does not
have write perms stripped for group and others, while on ext3, they do get
stripped, so I wonder if this is a cifsfs client 'feature'.
I'll try and dig through the client code, in case this is something I can
Anders Karlsson <trudheim@xxxxxxxxx>