On Wed, Nov 06, 2002 at 06:10:26PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > > - could `chown' be modified to complain if it fails to do the work it > > was supposed to do? It seems that the exit status is 0, and besides > > that the script simply does not care about the exit status of chown. > > Tricky. The problem (and the reason the script doesn't test the return > code) is, there are several conditions for having a working chown. It > must be NT/2K/XP, ntsec must be on, FS must be NTFS. The chown(2) syscall > returns intentionally always 0 if any of these conditions isn't met.
That behavior seems rather "non-unix-like". If chown(2) fails to work shouldn't return an error status, and possibly set ERRNO. Then chown(1) could report a reasonable error message and exit status. The script could continue to ignore the chown(1) success or failure at its own peril. -- Jon H. LaBadie [EMAIL PROTECTED] JG Computing 4455 Province Line Road (609) 252-0159 Princeton, NJ 08540-4322 (609) 683-7220 (fax) -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
