This is the mail archive of the cygwin-talk mailing list for the cygwin project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Updated [experimental]: findutils-4.3.0-1

On Wed, 18 Jan 2006, Eric Blake wrote:

> > Ok, thanks!  BTW, is /0444 also new?  Didn't it use to be +0444?
> Yes.  Actually, -perm +0444 still does the same as -perm /444,
> (as it is an extension to POSIX), but -perm +a+r does not
> behave like -perm /a+r (POSIX requires -perm +a+r to behave
> the same as -perm 444, not -perm /444).
> Or you could reread the manual:

Umm, yeah.  Looks like either the manpage needs to be updated (or my
ingrained Unix reflex to go to the manpage instead of the info file is
badly out of date).  If only we had a better info reader...

> $ grep -iC3 '/mode' /usr/share/doc/findutils*/NEWS
> I'd like to point out a second time that the interpretation of '-perm
> +mode' has changed to be more POSIX-compliant.
> [snip]
> Or even my release notes:

Heh, who reads those? ;-)

> And if you can't sleep at night, the long, lengthy explanation of the
> finer semantic points are in this bug report:

Thanks, I'll add it to my booklist. :-)

> > Interesting...  FWIW, I think having one -access test (and reusing the
> > code from -perm to parse +r/+w/+x/=r/=w/=x/-r/-w/-x) makes more sense...
> Why don't you propose it upstream?  The problem is the code for
> parsing symbolic permissions in -perm also parses stuff like
> sticky bits, and access() doesn't grant you visibility into that; also,
> it doesn't make sense to do -access g+r (when using access(), a
> file is either readable or it is not, without any bearing on user,
> group, or other, but accounting for ACLs; when using stat(), there
> really are 9 access bits to compare against, plus 3 extra bits, but
> with no ACL knowledge).  So I think James' choice of -readable,
> -writable, and -executable were probably the right way to do it.

Right.  I didn't mean "fully reuse the parsing code" -- more like factor
out the parsing of the parts I mentioned, and use it from both -access and
-perm...  But he's the maintainer, so it's his call anyway.  I'll post
something (hopefully a patch) to that bug report a bit later, I guess.

> Shoot - did I just give a valid technical reply on the -talk list?  I
> just hope no hippos fall on me tonight!

Well, technically, hippos don't fall -- they get dropped...
Who-o-o-osh...  *SPLAT*!
      |\      _,,,---,,_ |
ZZZzz /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_		Igor Peshansky, Ph.D. (name changed!)
     |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'		old name: Igor Pechtchanski
    '---''(_/--'  `-'\_) fL	a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-.  Meow!

"Las! je suis sot... -Mais non, tu ne l'es pas, puisque tu t'en rends compte."
"But no -- you are no fool; you call yourself a fool, there's proof enough in
that!" -- Rostand, "Cyrano de Bergerac"

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]