Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] TEST RELEASE: Cygwin 2.3.0-0.4

[Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin@cygwin.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2352 bytes --]

On Oct 27 10:53, Achim Gratz wrote:
> Am 27.10.2015 um 10:27 schrieb Corinna Vinschen:
> >>That test is almost as bad as it can ever get.  Given that enumerating all
> >>AD accouts with mkpasswd takes about 2 hours and I'm doing something very
> >>similar here, I'm not even surprised.  I was more surprised to see the
> >>server go so fast, but my guess is that it can use jumbo frames to talk to
> >>the AD.
> >
> >Ok, so you don't seem to think this is a major drawback.
> 
> I didn't say I would not like to see it run faster.

Me neither.  No wonder Windows largely skips showing effective
permissions unless explicitely requested by the user.

> But considering the
> alternatives, working correctly all the times at the current speed seems to
> cover my more typical uses a lot better.

Ok.

> >No worries.  I'm mulling over the idea to release 2.3.0 this week
> >without the new ACL handling code to get the latest fixes out of the
> >door first and push this stuff into a 2.4.0 release in November.
> 
> As long as you keep reminding us which snapshot has the new ACL handling
> code, that is OK with me.

I guess you should better use the latest test releases, which I'll
always build with the new ACL handling.  The snapshots are rather for
quick&dirty testing the latest changes.

> I will want to push out the snapshot in a week or
> two and remove some of my workarounds for ACL corrections and/or noacl
> mounted directories in order to see if these things are working now for
> real.

Cool.  I'm looking forward to it.

> >>>Given the above result, I'm wondering if we can afford using AuthZ at
> >>>all.  OTOH I don't see any other way to get the correct POSIX permissions
> >>>from a non-Cygwin ACL :(
> >>
> >>If you really want fast but incorrect there's always the "noacl" mount
> >>option.
> >
> >Right.  OTOH, maybe we could enhance the "acl" mount option?
> >
> >"acl" -> "quickacl" -> "noacl"?
> 
> Let's worry about that middle ground scenario when the ACL code has proven
> itself.  The danger here is that the edge cases that will make problems are
> not easy to spot before you run into them

Good point.


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]