Joshua Parker Ruehlig
Hall of Famer
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2011
- Messages
- 5,949
The "Add Storage" options creates a nullfs mountpoint, which is a link from one spot to another. Whether you look at the file in it's original location or nullfs mounted location (inside the jail) they reference the same files with the same permission levels, UID, and GID.
Files when viewer from a jail's perspective, or hosts perspective will have the same permission levels, UID, and GID. A jail, or host may associate these UID/GID using their local user/group database but these are not synced.
1) Mounting the files into the jail doesn't change the permission of anything. Changing them within the jail will change the from the host's perspective as well, even on the original (non-nullfs) location.
2) Yes, if you follow my blog and change ownership of your files to 'media:media' inside the jail, they will look like '816:816' from the host's perspective, even on the original (non-nullfs) location.
3) The media user or group aren't created directly during the blog post, either in the jail or on the host. They are indirectly created in jail when you install sabnzbd though, because that plugin requires that user.
4) I'm not an expert when it comes to CIFS but have a little experience with it. What I have done in the past (on FreeBSD not FreeNAS) is have CIFS do everything for a share as a certain user, this is where I recommend creating the 'media' user in the host. I then regulate CIFS access with CIFS accounts. I don't know is this is possible to setup with FreeNAS. There is probably other ways to skin this cat though and this forums is a good place to ask.
As for OpenELEC, I have alot of experience. For my media dataset I have a read-only NFS share that I limit to the subnets of my OpenELEC boxes (you could even limit to their IP if they're static). If someone smart and sneaky was on your network they could read your media files, but this method is more elegant and performant than CIFS.
5) I have no idea the difference between those two, I don't think setting it to Windows would break anything though. I think it is more a Share (CIFS/NFS) thing.
Files when viewer from a jail's perspective, or hosts perspective will have the same permission levels, UID, and GID. A jail, or host may associate these UID/GID using their local user/group database but these are not synced.
1) Mounting the files into the jail doesn't change the permission of anything. Changing them within the jail will change the from the host's perspective as well, even on the original (non-nullfs) location.
2) Yes, if you follow my blog and change ownership of your files to 'media:media' inside the jail, they will look like '816:816' from the host's perspective, even on the original (non-nullfs) location.
3) The media user or group aren't created directly during the blog post, either in the jail or on the host. They are indirectly created in jail when you install sabnzbd though, because that plugin requires that user.
4) I'm not an expert when it comes to CIFS but have a little experience with it. What I have done in the past (on FreeBSD not FreeNAS) is have CIFS do everything for a share as a certain user, this is where I recommend creating the 'media' user in the host. I then regulate CIFS access with CIFS accounts. I don't know is this is possible to setup with FreeNAS. There is probably other ways to skin this cat though and this forums is a good place to ask.
As for OpenELEC, I have alot of experience. For my media dataset I have a read-only NFS share that I limit to the subnets of my OpenELEC boxes (you could even limit to their IP if they're static). If someone smart and sneaky was on your network they could read your media files, but this method is more elegant and performant than CIFS.
5) I have no idea the difference between those two, I don't think setting it to Windows would break anything though. I think it is more a Share (CIFS/NFS) thing.