This is a discussion on DO NOT REPLY [Bug 5520] New: Rsync cannot copy to a vfat partitionon kernel 2.6.25+ within the Rsync forums, part of the Networking and Network Related category; https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5520 Summary: Rsync cannot copy to a vfat partition on kernel 2.6....
|
|||||||
| FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
|||
|
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5520
Summary: Rsync cannot copy to a vfat partition on kernel 2.6.25+ Product: rsync Version: 3.0.3 Platform: All URL: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=449080 OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: major Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned@samba.org ReportedBy: piskozub@iopan.gda.pl QAContact: rsync-qa@samba.org This was reported by me on the RedHat Bugzilla (URL given) and reclassified as a kernel bug. However, this seems to be caused by a conscious decision of the vfat Linux kernel developers and therefore may be easier to solve from the rsync end. In a nutshell: Rsync cannot now copy to a vfat partition even if the user is root (yes!). This is due to new and more strict vfat operations security model adopted in the kernel. When rsync tries to mkstemp it gets a "not permitted" error. This bug was discussed on LKML (the best URL is http://www.gossamer-threads.com/list.../kernel/927626) with n conclusions so far. However it is clear that: 1) Kernel 2.6.25 (and newer) does not let "allows only acceptable chmod(), and if not acceptable, it returns -EPERM. Old one allows even if it can't store the disk inode." 2) As Hirofumi Ogawa explained to me in an email: "rsync will try to set permission to 0700 or something. But, FAT can't store almost permissions to storage, because FAT doesn't have permission field on disk inode (FAT have permission field on only memory inode). So, chmod() returns -EPERM." 3) It is not clear how and whether at all it will be solved in the kernel because as Pavel Machek put it: "So we have choice between security hole and regression...?" The question is: Can this be solved from the rsync end? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.samba.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. -- Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing list. To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html |
|
|||
|
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5520
wayned@samba.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED ------- Comment #1 from wayned@samba.org 2008-06-14 13:13 CST ------- I assume that the -EPERM error is at the kernel level, and the application gets a return of -1 with errno = EPERM. It would be much better to return errno = EINVAL so that the error could be easily distinguished from a real EPERM error where the user doesn't have permission to operate on the file. Since the kernel call is complaining about being unable to support the requested permissions, EINVAL seems like a much more logical error to me. But let's leave that aside for now. I assume it is the fchmod() function that is returning the error (sadly, the strace in the original bug report did not contain the process that was actually failing). If so, you can avoid the mkstemp failure by not asking rsync to preserve permissions (e.g. --no-p). So, is the issue that rsync is trying to create a mode 0600 file and the mount options are set to make the mount world-readable/writable? I'd be loath to make rsync retry the fchmod() call with 0666 unless the user asked for that explicitly. Or perhaps have an option to just skip the fchmod() on the temp file? Any no-option ideas that are safe? Perhaps test if the new temp file has bits set outside the umask, and if so, skip the fchmod()? You might also try changing your mount options to mount the media as a single user, which I would imagine would make a mode of 0600 acceptable to the kernel. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.samba.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. -- Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing list. To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html |
|
|||
|
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5520
------- Comment #2 from piskozub@iopan.gda.pl 2008-06-14 16:26 CST ------- Changing the mount options and/or rsyncing as root did not help in my original tests. But I probably missed a thing with the options reporting they do not affect the problem (see below). I did more tests today under the newest Fedora 9 kernel (kernel-2.6.25.6-55.fc9). You are right about the options. This happens only with -p (or -a which is probably why I missed it before). I actually could successfully sync the vfat partition replacing -a with -rt (because I did not need the other components of -a on a FAT partition, anyway). This means there is a simple workaround but still either rsync or the kernel should be MHO modified to avoid the -p problem. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.samba.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. -- Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing list. To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|