2009/7/13 Latchesar Ionkov <lu...@ionkov.net>: > On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 2:24 AM, sqweek<sqw...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Anyway, note that if you auth you'll need supporting software from >> p9p also. Factotum and srv -a, in particular, then give v9fs a -o >> trans=unix. > > I don't think that auth is working with v9fs at all. The auth support > got dropped accidentally with some of the changes, probably when > access=user|any|<uid> was introduced. I.e. my fault.
I didn't realise v9fs ever had auth support. Here is how I've been getting an authenticated mount for years: # create mountpoint $ n=$HOME/n $ mkdir -p $n/wren # need factotum running to do the dirty work $ factotum # srv -a posts a pre-authenticated socket in the p9p ns directory # wren is my fileserver $ srv -a wren !adding key: role=client proto=p9sk1 dom=sqweek.dnsdojo.org user[sqweek]: password: $ 9mount -i 'unix!/tmp/ns.sqweek.:0/wren' $n/wren (or) $ mount -t 9p -o uname=sqweek,trans=unix,noextend,dfltuid=$(id -u),dfltgid=$(id -g) /tmp/ns.sqweek.:0/wren $n/wren # I'm not sure if uname is strictly necessary $ 9bind $n/wren/home/sqweek/mail $HOME/sqweek/mail # various other binds Jorden mentioned it's a bad idea to let anyone mount anything because everyone shares the same namespace. 9mount does have some sanity checks for that environment, it will only let you mount over a directory you have write access to (and isn't sticky) or is under your home dir. Never really been field tested though :) > Adding the support we had before the access= support is probably easy, > but I would like to make it better and support authentication for > multiple users. Still no idea what is the correct way. :( Any > suggestions are welcome. Can't help you there - I'm not sure it makes sense to try and put factotum's functionality in the linux kernel... Is there some problem with the private namespace/individual user mount approach? -sqweek
