Re: [PATCH RESEND] implement uid and gid mount options for ext2, ext3 and ext4

On 05/11/2012 10:22 PM, Ted Ts'o wrote:

On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 08:18:35PM +0300, Boaz Harrosh wrote:

quoted

How is that ext* special? You said "Unix systems" there are lots more
FSs more common to "Unix" systems

Well, because FreeBSD, NetBSD, and Hurd do support ext2/3*.  So if you
want a file system which is higher performance than VFAT, and
supported on Unix-like systems beyond Linux, ext* is the best choice
in a number of cases.

That was a rhetorical questions. I meant  ext* is not special. There
are plenty of other FFs that are common to unix systems.

As far as NTFS is concerned, the *BSD's can only support NTFS via
FUSE, and I've been suspicious about the quality of our ntfs support
under Linux --- we don't have a full-featured fsck for it, for
example.  I'm at least not comfortable using NTFS on my personal
machines.  (Last I checked there were all sorts of asterisks about
data corruption if the system crashed before Linux mounted it, since
apparently NTFS's logging subsystem was never reverse-engineered.)

No! on all modern Linux distro's ntfs (ntfs-3g) is supported with
that infamous FUSE driver. The Kernel driver is long dead. The same
FUSE driver is also used under *BSD and officially supported by
Apple in OSX. Last benchmarks I saw where Faster then ext2 and in-par
with ext3, MetaData faster, IO slower then ext3. Stability is very
good and I never had an issue, on any of the above systems.

There is also a very good fsck and a suit of other tools under the same
ntfs-3g project. To date I have fixed 10s of friends/family Windows
machines with a Linux rescue USB-stick, I mean machines that would even
boot.

quoted

As a maintainer of ext4 filesystem which is the official system for
Linux in many distrows, still. Please resists any such crap.
User "convenience-vs-security was never a geol of Unix.

Did you look at the proposal I made?  By making it something where the
file system is explicitly marked as "for interchange", it avoids the
security problem (as much as you can when you put your unencrypted
data on removable, portable storage which could be lost or stolen).

Sure, if you don't need to operate on the data as a mounted file
system, tar or cpio or zip is a good choice for maximal portability.
But if you want to do something like rsync on a portable SSD, 

Again, for the last time, you are the maintainer, you do what you
understand, I hope Linus or someone can make it more clear than me.

There is nothing special about USB sticks and ext* filesystems it
is the same old "shared files" problem. If you are not under a single
NIS domain, then these are different users. If files need to be shared
they need to sit in the proper CHMODed directory and bits.

I have at home a bittorent network directory for the all family, So the
first time I set it up I had to ssh into the server and fix the permissions.
That was easy enough listen to learn.

For the last time and I'm off this for good:
	"Shared files" problem is not solved by mount options.

Been there done that


<snip>