Hi Takashi, On Jan 8 19:39, Takashi Yano wrote: > On Wed, 8 Jan 2025 06:14:24 +0900 > Takashi Yano wrote: > > Hi Corinna, > > > > On Tue, 7 Jan 2025 17:48:59 +0100 > > Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > > So... given how this is supposed to work, we must not use the > > > FILE_OPEN_FOR_BACKUP_INTENT flag when checking for execute permissions > > > and the result should be the desired one. I tested this locally, and I > > > don't see a regression compared to 3.5.4. > > > > > > Patch attached. Please review. > > > > Thanks for reviewing and the counter patch. > > > > With your patch, access(_, X_OK) returns -1 for a directory without 'x' > > permission even with Administrator. > > This seems due to lack of FILE_OPEN_FOR_BACKUP_INTENT. > > > > How about simpler patch attached? > > Revised a bit.
Nice change. At first I thought the addition of FILE_READ_DATA for files is over the top, but yeah, it seems we really have to do it to get reliable results. I pushed a variation of this to both branches. Thanks, Corinna
