Lawrence Mayer wrote:
On Dec 18 20:53, Lawrence Mayer wrote:
Is there any way to get noacl functionality when using MS-DOS
destination
paths?
My etc/fstab file (below) applies noacl for UNIX destination paths e.g.
C:\cygwin\bin\mkdir.exe /c/foo
creates directory C:\foo with NTFS default permissions inherited from
parent directory C:\ (the same as DOS mkdir C:\foo would do).
But an MS-DOS destination path, e.g.
C:\cygwin\bin\mkdir.exe C:\foo
causes Cygwin to ignore noacl in etc/fstab and create C:\foo with
POSIX-like permissions (non-NTFS default and not inherited from parent
directory C:\).
According to http://cygwin.com/1.7/cygwin-ug-net.html#mount-table
"Otherwise, the handling of MS-DOS filenames bypasses the mount table"
But if Cygwin 1.7 bypasses etc/fstab for MS-DOS filenames and no longer
supports the nontsec option, I'm stuck.
When using MS-DOS destination paths in Cygwin 1.7, is there any way
to get
noacl functionality - i.e. where Cygwin creates objects with NTFS
default
permissions inherited from their parent directory rather than POSIX-like
permissions?
If not, are there any plans to add such functionality to Cygwin 1.7?
On 11:59, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
Not yet. I'm reluctant to add a setting just for DOS paths. What we
could do is to handle incoming DOS paths always in dumb Windows mode
(noacl,posix=0). Given that they are not POSIX paths anyway, there's
probably not a lot of sense in treating them POSIXy.
Corinna
Thanks so much for replying Corinna. I completely agree that always
handling DOS paths with noacl,posix=0 makes sense and is a substantial
improvement.
I'm amazed how quickly you implemented this change into v1.7.0-36!
Thanks so much!
Would you like any help updating the Cygwin User's Guide to reflect this
change? If so:
(1) Should I submit a diff -u against
http://cygwin.com/1.7/cygwin-ug-net.html?
Actually, it would be
<http://cygwin.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/winsup/doc/pathnames.sgml?rev=1.27&content-type=text/x-cvsweb-markup&cvsroot=src>
The UG is a collection of SGML files that get cobbled together by other
tools.
(2) Should I send the diff to cygwin-patc...@cygwin.com?
1 out of 2 ain't bad. ;-) Yes, that's the right place. Take a look at
other patch submissions there to get an idea of what is needed.
Thanks,
--
Larry Hall http://www.rfk.com
RFK Partners, Inc. (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office
216 Dalton Rd. (508) 893-9889 - FAX
Holliston, MA 01746
_____________________________________________________________________
A: Yes.
> Q: Are you sure?
>> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
>>> Q: Why is top posting annoying in email?
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
