noacl functionality for MS-DOS destination paths?
Larry Hall (Cygwin)
Fri Dec 19 23:24:00 GMT 2008
Lawrence Mayer wrote:
>> On Dec 18 20:53, Lawrence Mayer wrote:
>>> Is there any way to get noacl functionality when using MS-DOS
>>> My etc/fstab file (below) applies noacl for UNIX destination paths e.g.
>>> C:\cygwin\bin\mkdir.exe /c/foo
>>> creates directory C:\foo with NTFS default permissions inherited from
>>> parent directory C:\ (the same as DOS mkdir C:\foo would do).
>>> But an MS-DOS destination path, e.g.
>>> C:\cygwin\bin\mkdir.exe C:\foo
>>> causes Cygwin to ignore noacl in etc/fstab and create C:\foo with
>>> POSIX-like permissions (non-NTFS default and not inherited from parent
>>> directory C:\).
>>> According to http://cygwin.com/1.7/cygwin-ug-net.html#mount-table
>>> "Otherwise, the handling of MS-DOS filenames bypasses the mount table"
>>> But if Cygwin 1.7 bypasses etc/fstab for MS-DOS filenames and no longer
>>> supports the nontsec option, I'm stuck.
>>> When using MS-DOS destination paths in Cygwin 1.7, is there any way
>>> to get
>>> noacl functionality - i.e. where Cygwin creates objects with NTFS
>>> permissions inherited from their parent directory rather than POSIX-like
>>> If not, are there any plans to add such functionality to Cygwin 1.7?
> On 11:59, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> Not yet. I'm reluctant to add a setting just for DOS paths. What we
>> could do is to handle incoming DOS paths always in dumb Windows mode
>> (noacl,posix=0). Given that they are not POSIX paths anyway, there's
>> probably not a lot of sense in treating them POSIXy.
> Thanks so much for replying Corinna. I completely agree that always
> handling DOS paths with noacl,posix=0 makes sense and is a substantial
> I'm amazed how quickly you implemented this change into v1.7.0-36!
> Thanks so much!
> Would you like any help updating the Cygwin User's Guide to reflect this
> change? If so:
> (1) Should I submit a diff -u against
Actually, it would be
The UG is a collection of SGML files that get cobbled together by other
> (2) Should I send the diff to email@example.com?
1 out of 2 ain't bad. ;-) Yes, that's the right place. Take a look at
other patch submissions there to get an idea of what is needed.
Larry Hall http://www.rfk.com
RFK Partners, Inc. (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office
216 Dalton Rd. (508) 893-9889 - FAX
Holliston, MA 01746
> Q: Are you sure?
>> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
>>> Q: Why is top posting annoying in email?
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
More information about the Cygwin