Greetings, Michael Enright! >> >> > ----rwx---+ 1 menright Mike Enright 0 Oct 21 15:02 CMakeLists.txt >> >> the "+" says that there's extended ACL present. So, nothing odd. >>
> The Windows view of this set of permissions (070 plus whatever is in > the rest of the ACL) This is NOT "windows" view, this is Cygwin view. For ACL, check getfacl <file>. > seems to be that Windows programs can't do very > much with this file. See my previous note about setting noacl flag to increase interoperability with native programs. > So it's odd from that POV and I wonder if that was caused by my renaming the > "Cygwin account". I'm not clear on how exactly renaming was done, so can't comment. > Using cacls I see the > Windows username in some of the entries and I don't see the cygwin > username in any. I know that I can get a workable ACL with chmod but I > can see that executables built by the compiler are not executable, > either by name from cygwin bash or by double click from Windows > Explorer. This is the first few lines from cacls: > $ cacls moneymaker > C:\cygwin64\home\menright\moneymaker NULL SID:(DENY)(special access:) > READ_CONTROL > FILE_READ_EA > FILE_WRITE_EA > FILE_EXECUTE > FILE_DELETE_CHILD This is normal (documented) behavior for less-than-trivial permission setups. However, without a full dump of cacls it's hard to judge correctness of the ACL on a given file. -- With best regards, Andrey Repin Monday, October 22, 2018 14:58:59 Sorry for my terrible english... -- 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
