This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: More passwd/group patches
At 02:04 PM 11/24/2002 +0100, you wrote:
First off I am going to look at the Win98 home directory problem
reported on the list, if you have not fixed it already.
>a few comments:
>On Fri, Nov 22, 2002 at 09:54:32AM -0500, Pierre A. Humblet wrote:
>A formatting nit:
OK, note taken.
>I don't like the idea that these DENY bits are still set when the acl is
>returned to the application. The underlying Solaris acl implementation
>doesn't know about these bits. They should be removed before returning
>the acl to the application. Otherwise you're using bits which are not
>defined in acl.h.
That had crossed my mind. In fact acl.h does not declare any values for
the a_perm field. Cygwin is simply reproducing the bits in the
user, group and other fields. I searched the web and saw that other
versions of unix did not even agree on the type of the a_perm field (Cygwin
makes it mode_t) and that the now-defunct standard proposal was silent on the
issue. So it seemed to me that all that mattered was consistency with
the implementation of the routines getfacl, setfacl, etc...
I have no problem with masking them off. Defining specific bits in acl.h
would be nice in theory, but in absence of a standard perhaps not useful.
>You're copying the group bits to the mask? Didn't you suggest to set
>it to rwx? I think you're right. It would be better to move this line
>to the initialization of the first lacl members and change it to
Yes, but not knowing the reason for the current behavior I didn't want
to change it. It doesn't hurt anything.
>Same here, shouldn't the DEF_CLASS_OBJ entry have rwx, too?