> > > > On 14.08.21 20:19, Adriano Vilela Barbosa wrote: > > > > > > > > On Sat, 14 Aug 2021 at 12:54, bruno zanetti <bzanett...@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Il giorno sab 14 ago 2021 alle ore 15:39 Adriano Vilela Barbosa > > > > <adriano.vil...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > Yesterday I came across a very weird behavior while > > > > annotating a pdf > > > > file in Okular. Long story short: I opened a read-only pdf > > > > file > > > > (permissions: 400), inserted some comments and hit the save > > > > button. At > > > > this point, I thought I had been working on a write-enabled > > > > copy of > > > > the file. After a while, I realized that I was actually > > > > working on the > > > > read-only version of the file, that somehow got saved to > > > > disk when I > > > > hit the save icon. Okular was not only able to save the > > > > file to disk, > > > > but the file permissions were changed to 644. > > > > > > > > I initially thought this was an Okular problem. However, > > > > after some > > > > more testing, I was able to reproduce the problem with > > > > Xournal. This > > > > makes me think that the problem is not with Okular or > > > > Xournal, but > > > > with some common library used by both of these packages > > > > (maybe > > > > libpoppler?). > > > > > > > > Has anybody had this problem? Can anybody reproduce it? > > > > > > > > I'm using Debian testing. > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot, > > > > > > > > Adriano > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Adriano, > > > the read-only permission on the pdf file just prevents it's > > > contents to be changed. > > > It still can be deleted if the directory it belongs to is not > > > write protected. > > > Editor programs usually do not directly change the contents of a > > > file but rather > > > save them to a temporary new one (with default permissions), > > > delete the original > > > and then rename the new file replacing the original one. I don't > > > know if Okular > > > works this way, but I think it quite likely does. > > > > > > Have a good release day! > > > > > > Bruno > > > > > > > > Hi Bruno, > > > > Thanks for your reply. > > > > Indeed, what you describe may be what's happening. If I change the > > permissions of the directory where the file is to read-only, I get an > > error message when trying to save the file. The error message says the > > file could not be saved (error: access denied), and also says that it > > could not write to file.pdf.part (this .part file must be temporary > > file you mentioned). > > > > I understand this mechanism, but I think this is quite controversial > > and problematic. I mean, as an end user I don't care what the editor > > is doing behind the scenes; it just shouldn't be able to modify a file > > marked as read-only. > > > > This is the first time I came across this behavior. No text editor I > > ever used does this; LibreOffice doesn't do it either (rather, it > > shows a message saying the document is open in read-only and shows an > > "Edit Document" button, which allows you to edit the document and then > > save it under a different name). > > > > The question is: should I file a bug report somewhere? I really don't > > want editors overwriting my read-only documents... > > > > Thanks again, > > > > Adriano > > > Adriano, I am simply a user, not a developer. I fully agree with you and > suggest to file a > bug report. In 30 years computing I have never noticed and assumed something > like this, and > although the explanation of Bruno sounds reasonable, the behavior is not > reasonable at all > from the point of view of a user! Until you and Bruno mentioned this > behavior, I would not > even have expected this to be possible by the filesystem's policy and > initially reading > your original post suspect this even to be a filesystem bug! If data > represented by a file > name is marked read-only on the filesystem level, then for this file name the > data should > not be replaceable. If this technically would be possible, like Bruno > suspects it, then > this still doesn't make it right from the users point of view. > > > --- > Just my thoughts! > Marco.
Hi Marco, I totally agree with you. As I said, I also have never seen this behavior before. However, if the mechanism described by Bruno is what is actually happening (and I think it is, because of the error message about the .part file I got when I changed the directory permissions), I don't see how the file system could prevent that. I'm going to file a bug report upstream. Thanks, Adriano
