On Sat, Apr 09, 2005 at 12:01:53AM -0700, Stephen Gildea wrote: > I also point out that if a chown/chmod operation by root on an existent > directory fails, there's nothing to be done about it, whether you notice > it or not.
My response would be inclined to be "run fsck". Programs should report this kind of error and fail, because it may be the first sign of filesystem corruption. > > And regarding the example, it's just this, an example, and therefor > > probably not really a policy recomendation in itself. > > I agree. I notice that the example script fragment in 9.1.2 will not > fail if the mkdir (the most important operation) fails. Thus I suspect > that the script's failing if the chown or chmod fails is a bug in the > example script. There's a good reason (specified above it) why the script doesn't fail if the mkdir fails, but given that the mkdir has succeeded I think it should be entitled to expect normal POSIX filesystem semantics after that. Cheers, -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
