From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 92274 invoked by alias); 27 Oct 2015 09:54:05 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Received: (qmail 92265 invoked by uid 89); 27 Oct 2015 09:54:04 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-6.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: plane.gmane.org Received: from plane.gmane.org (HELO plane.gmane.org) (80.91.229.3) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 27 Oct 2015 09:54:02 +0000 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Zr0x3-0005qS-86 for cygwin@cygwin.com; Tue, 27 Oct 2015 10:53:57 +0100 Received: from p5b14d127.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([91.20.209.39]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 27 Oct 2015 10:53:57 +0100 Received: from Stromeko by p5b14d127.dip0.t-ipconnect.de with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 27 Oct 2015 10:53:57 +0100 To: cygwin@cygwin.com From: Achim Gratz Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] TEST RELEASE: Cygwin 2.3.0-0.4 Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2015 13:28:00 -0000 Message-ID: References: <20151026100756.GC31990@calimero.vinschen.de> <562E4ED0.7020907@Nexgo.DE> <20151027092722.GN5319@calimero.vinschen.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 In-Reply-To: <20151027092722.GN5319@calimero.vinschen.de> X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-10/txt/msg00482.txt.bz2 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. But considering the alternatives, working correctly all the times at the current speed seems to cover my more typical uses a lot better. > 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 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. >>> 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 -- Achim. (on the road :-) -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple