On 04/06/2013 11:27 PM, Bob Proulx wrote: > Pádraig Brady wrote: >>> - && chmod -w $@-t \ >>> + && chmod a-w $@-t \ >> >> I'll apply that fix. > > I think it is always a good idea to use 'a' when there isn't any other > specific reason to do anything different. Or put the reverse way, > whenever I see a naken "-[rwx]" then I am suspicious of the action. > Because it masks with umask and is almost never what is desired. > >> What system does the build fail on as a matter of interest. > > This will occur on any system that has umask set to 022. Here is an example: > > $ umask 022 > $ touch foo > $ chmod ug+w foo > $ chmod -w foo > chmod: foo: new permissions are r--rw-r--, not r--r--r-- > $ echo $? > 1
But if the umask is 022, then those write bits shouldn't be set anyway? You're forcing g+w above. thanks, Pádraig.
