From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <f.ebner@proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F054C92021
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 31 Jan 2024 15:00:33 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id C990D3B8BF
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 31 Jan 2024 15:00:03 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com
 [94.136.29.106])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256)
 (No client certificate requested)
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 31 Jan 2024 15:00:03 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
 by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 02E8A49382
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 31 Jan 2024 15:00:03 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <c6fd15c7-cf74-45fb-b64c-74a910b4b258@proxmox.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2024 15:00:02 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-US
From: Fiona Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com>
To: Markus Frank <m.frank@proxmox.com>,
 Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
Reply-To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
References: <20231108085254.53574-1-m.frank@proxmox.com>
 <20231108085254.53574-3-m.frank@proxmox.com>
 <38d62435-50ed-48ac-96f5-932e2be9e2c7@proxmox.com>
 <d074c5be-98d9-4179-b5b5-126894904a16@proxmox.com>
 <feac865d-d462-480b-bc7d-02848fddd212@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <feac865d-d462-480b-bc7d-02848fddd212@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL -0.073 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
 BAYES_00                 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
 DMARC_MISSING             0.1 Missing DMARC policy
 KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
 SPF_HELO_NONE           0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
 SPF_PASS               -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
 T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE    -0.01 -
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH guest-common v8 2/7] add Dir mapping config
X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2024 14:00:34 -0000

Am 31.01.24 um 14:53 schrieb Fiona Ebner:
> Am 31.01.24 um 14:42 schrieb Markus Frank:
> 
> 
>>>
>>> What could also be mentioned for xattr and acl: do the underlying file
>>> systems need to support these? What happens if they don't?
>> ACLs and xattrs just get ignored if not supported.
> 
> 
> Please include that in the description, thanks!
> 

But wait, in the docs you say that you need to disable the setting for
Windows to make it work. So it's not simply ignored, at least not in all
cases. And I guess this is also the reason why there are overrides for
xattr and acl in the VM configuration (or why else would we need those
rather than just using the setting from the mapping)?