New ZFS "passthrough" ACL inheritance rules [PSARC/2008/231 FastTrack timeout 04/08/2008]

[Darren J Moffat]

Mark Shellenbaum wrote:
> Darren J Moffat wrote:
>> Since this proposed behaviour is the default for ACLs on UFS why isn't 
>> it the default for ZFS too ?
> 
> I'm more than willing to make this the default behavior for ZFS, but it 
> will affect POSIX compliance.  If thats alright with everyone then I can 
> change it to be the default.

Would this be the one and only setting that means that a ZFS dataset 
wouldn't be in a POSIX compliant configuration by default ?  If it is 
then I would say it shouldn't be changed.  However if there are others 
then IMO the default ACL behaviour should be the one that matches NFSv4 
and what people expect of ACLs regardless of what POSIX thinks.


>>
>> Also shouldn't "secure" be "posix" because "secure" is subjective and 
>> relative.
>>
> 
> secure is what it was called in the original ZFS ARC case.  I can change 
> it to "posix" if you want.  My only concern would be if users have 
> become accustomed to its present value.

What about an alias ?

-- 
Darren J Moffat