On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 10:23:38AM -0500, Ted Zlatanov wrote: > Scott Howard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Numeric modes are not currently supported (ie, --chmod 0755). Although they > > would be easy to add, I'm not sure if it's a good idea or not? It really only > > make sense if you're only copying single files - as soon as you start copying > > directories it's going to get messy trying to use the same modes for > > dirs and files. > > Instead of just --chmod, you probably want --file-chmod and > --dir-chmod as well. The logic can get hairy, but there definitely > should be a distinction, so we don't end up making files executable > unnecessarily. --chmod should override the other two, I think, rather > than trying to overlay permissions. That would simplify the logic.
This would be trivial to implement, but I'm really not sure it's needed. This option is akin to the chmod -R command, and it doesn't allow this distinction. As far as making files executable, thats where +X comes in - it allows you to set/reset exec permissions if and only if it already exists for at least one of user, group or other. eg : <<scott@milliways tmp>> ls -l total 16 drwx------ 2 scott users 69 Apr 4 07:33 test1 -rw------- 1 scott users 536 Apr 4 07:33 test2 <<scott@milliways tmp>> chmod a+rX test1 test2 <<scott@milliways tmp>> ls -l total 16 drwxr-xr-x 2 scott users 69 Apr 4 07:33 test1 -rw-r--r-- 1 scott users 536 Apr 4 07:33 test2 Scott. -- To unsubscribe or change options: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
