[07:27] Morning! [09:20] Morning [12:29] Morning peoples, critters and everything else [13:33] mornin === r00t^2 is now known as soandso === soandso is now known as r00t^2 [19:01] Anyone know a way to intentionally make NFS report less free space than it would otherwise? [19:08] hmm. I can use quotas but that looks complicated for such a simple problem. [19:10] ChinnoDog: What filesystem is the actual data on? [19:11] btrfs but that is only because it is my system. I can't assume it is any particular file system because it is part of a vagrant project. [19:11] Well... nfs does not actually "report" the available space [19:13] i think the base problem is you have these edge cases that you expect to be covered- why on earth would you want an NFS share to seem smaller than it is? [19:14] if it's because you don't want people to use more than X amount, then yes- that's exactly what quotas are for [19:15] No, it is a band-aid for a script that selects a directory to store its data. [19:15] It selects the volume with the largest free space by default but that volume is the NFS mount and causes the software to break because it can't put its data there. [19:16] bandaids aren't good. add exclusion/priority support in the script [19:16] I can't. It isn't my script. [19:16] Also, it is subject to updates so I can't modify it. [19:17] pin it at the current version? Or don't allow the script / program calling it to even know your nfs share exists [19:17] It is definitely a script shortcoming but nothing I can do anything about. [19:17] then file a bug with the maintainer of the script [19:17] Is there an easy way to deny permission to it to only one user? [19:17] oh, sure [19:18] Yes, that is a long term solution but not one that I can use right now. [19:18] https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/6/html/Storage_Administration_Guide/ch-acls.html [19:19] or you can do it via standard octals and ownerships [19:21] I can see how I can use additive permissions for it but not deny permissions [19:23] make sure user:user is not a match to that using script [19:23] and then set appropriate octals [19:24] I need other users to be able to access it though. I'm not sure which ones. I will check and see if I can use additive permissions for just those users. [19:24] then make sure they are in :group [19:25] Folder "ubuntu" has ownership chinno:pa [19:25] jthan and Chinno are in group pa [19:25] bts is not [19:26] I think you are missing what I am trying to say but it doesn't matter. I should be able to identify which users need access. [19:28] You lost me, Chinno. [19:32] I wanted to deny permission to a single user which linux/unix doesn't support. It only supports an additive permissions model. [19:35] jthan: i was wrong, more than 5 seconds. btw. [19:36] ChinnoDog: I think you can do it with acls [19:37] I have never seen a subtractive linux ACL. [19:39] setfacl -m user:USERNAME:--- [19:39] setfacl -m user:USERNAME:--- [19:39] ~*ta-da*~ [19:40] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Access_Control_Lists [19:41] while you're at it, you should probably grab a copy of http://www.amazon.com/UNIX-Linux-System-Administration-Handbook/dp/0131480057/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1439494862&sr=8-1&keywords=unix+and+linux+system+administration+handbook [19:47] oh. The ACL is on top of the unix permissions. I didn't realize they weren't the same thing. [19:47] That is more complexity than I need. I think I can solve it without it. [19:47] Oh yeah - has to be installed but.. no real configuration and REALLY easy to use thereafter. [19:49] jthan: it's actually usually installed by default [19:49] but the fs needs to be *remounted* with support for them [19:49] or enabled via tune2fs [19:50] but yeah i mean.. you aren't really going to find something more simple than that. [20:26] No umask on nfs :-(