On 03/06/2012 12:41 AM, Jim Meyering wrote:
> I like it. Thanks!
> I noted one typo:
OK, thanks, I fixed that, improved the documentation a bit
more, added a test case, and pushed the following into
coreutils master on savannah:
>From 46d91221a03dae7cfa9dd21aa36e4c2f121a0cc6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 03/05/2012 02:27 PM, Bruno Haible wrote:
>
>> Then how about using "==" or ":=" to designate the assignment?
>
> That's too fancy. Plain '=' would be better.
>
> We can also support notations like '+700' and '-77' to
> OR-in or AND-out arbitrary masks. This would be
> a cl
On 03/05/2012 02:27 PM, Bruno Haible wrote:
> Then how about using "==" or ":=" to designate the assignment?
That's too fancy. Plain '=' would be better.
We can also support notations like '+700' and '-77' to
OR-in or AND-out arbitrary masks. This would be
a clear and straightforward extension
On Mon, 2012-03-05 at 23:27 +0100, Bruno Haible wrote:
> Ondrej Vasik wrote:
> > Therefore @ sign was chosen
> > based on http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=8391#59 ...
>
> The choice was pretty random:
>"we can choose some otherwise-unused character, such as '@'."
>
> By the same a
Ondrej Vasik wrote:
> Therefore @ sign was chosen
> based on http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=8391#59 ...
The choice was pretty random:
"we can choose some otherwise-unused character, such as '@'."
By the same argument one could also choose any of
'%'
'^'
','
'.'
'_'
> H
On Mon, 2012-03-05 at 21:20 +0100, Bruno Haible wrote:
> Paul Eggert wrote:
> > this use of "+" does not conflict with input usages like
> > "chmod +x foo".
>
> It's because this use of '+' is easy to remember.
> "chmod +x" means "add execution permissions".
> "chmod -x" means "remove execution pe
Bruno Haible wrote:
> It's because this use of '+' is easy to remember.
> "chmod +x" means "add execution permissions".
> "chmod -x" means "remove execution permissions".
To be pedantic that isn't quite true. To be pedantic it actually is
gated by the process umask in effect at that time. You ne
Paul Eggert wrote:
> this use of "+" does not conflict with input usages like
> "chmod +x foo".
It's because this use of '+' is easy to remember.
"chmod +x" means "add execution permissions".
"chmod -x" means "remove execution permissions".
You want a symbol for "assign exact permissions".
IMO th
On 03/05/2012 08:42 AM, Bruno Haible wrote:
> This use of '@' in a mode string conflicts with the use of '@' on
> MacOS X 10.5 and newer to designate "extended attributes" (like
> quarantine information on MacOS X 10.7).
I don't see why. That's an *output* format, whereas we're
talking about an *
Ondrej Vasik cited Paul Eggert:
> > recommend leading '@' for future scripts.
This use of '@' in a mode string conflicts with the use of '@' on
MacOS X 10.5 and newer to designate "extended attributes" (like
quarantine information on MacOS X 10.7).
$ /bin/ls -l /etc/ntp.conf
-rw-r--r--@ 1 root w
On Fri, 2012-02-24 at 11:47 -0800, Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 02/24/2012 11:33 AM, Ondrej Vasik wrote:
> > Yes, but `chmod @755 DIR' approach will not let you to write a script
> > which will work without modification on RHEL-4,RHEL-5 and RHEL-6
> > machine...
>
> None of these approaches will let yo
11 matches
Mail list logo
