On 2015-12-22 12:37, Houder wrote:
On 2015-12-21 18:25, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Dec 21 17:30, Houder wrote:
Hi Corinna,
For next year !!!!! (posted as a reminder) ... See below.
Next year? Nope... see below.
Hi Corinna,
Thank you for all the hard work you do ...
As an encore (for this year though ;-). See below (Cygwin-2.4.0-0.16).
<==== 16
[snip]
64-%% setfacl -m m:rwx bar.txt
64-%% getfacl bar.txt
# file: bar.txt
# owner: Henri
# group: None
user::rw-
group::r--
mask:rwx <==== yes, as requested by me, but ...
other:r--
64-%% ls -l bar.txt
-rw-rwxr-- 1 Henri None 0 Dec 22 12:21 bar.txt
- does this output make sense?
(no access to Linux at the moment; cannot verify)
From acl(5):
CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN ACL ENTRIES AND FILE PERMISSION BITS
The permissions defined by ACLs are a superset of the permissions
specified by the file permission bits.
There is a correspondence between the file owner, group, and other
permissions and specific ACL entries: the owner permissions
correspond
to the permissions of the ACL_USER_OBJ entry. If the ACL has an
<==== yes, but ...
ACL_MASK entry, the group permissions correspond to the permissions
of
the ACL_MASK entry.
From setfacl(1);
OPTIONS
-n, --no-mask
Do not recalculate the effective rights mask. The default
behavior of setfacl is to recalculate the ACL mask entry,
unless
a mask entry was explicitly given. The mask entry is set to
the <==== Oh, ah!
union of all permissions of the owning group, and all named
user
and group entries. (These are exactly the entries affected by
the
mask entry).
setfacl.c:
int
recompute_mask (aclent_t *tgt, int tcnt, int got_mask, int got_def_mask)
{
...
/* Recompute mask, if requested
- If we got a mask in the input string, recompute only if --mask
has been
specified.
...
Your call, Corinna ... but reading setfacl(1)
Regards,
Henri
=====
--
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
