Confusion with ACLs and Perl's file tests...maybe bug???

[Linda Walsh]

Reini Urban wrote:

> Thanks for the nice testcase. I'll try to take it upstream.
> But I'm not too confident that p5p will fix it, e.g. they refused to
> fix File::Copy::cp, keeping the perms as with /bin/cp for several
> years.
> I could recently fix the cygwin write check if you had admin rights though.

---------------

I've noticed a distinct tendancy to want to keep broken, kludgy behavior, rather
than fix it, because broken and kludgy is what makes perl special to them.

OTOH, w/r/t/ the original problem, you have some calls that try to be 'posix 
compliant', and other calls that try to conform to NEW posix behaviors that 
aren't "officially" approved, but are adopted by most of the industry.

But then you have conservative types who want to uphold "THE" posix standard (as 
if there is only 1).  Last I counted,  there were about 3 revisions that are not 
wholly compatible with each other, so having one set of tools want to
stay stuck to one standard, while others try to move on, is a recipe for
headaches, and those who decided to bawk at Larry's new Perl6 idea (for good 
reason, IM_personal_feeling), were also among the most conservative and least
likely to change crowd -- meaning, fixing things, and moving to modern 
standards...  That's a bit too scarey -- we don't know what might happen...
so we better not do anything...

Blech...  Extremes are not usually good for humans...

So ACLS are one of those 'new fangled things' that aren't on the officially 
approved list... so expecting those who want to adhere to the 15 year old 
standard based on practices that were in place at the time dating back 10 years
prior, to actually move to the modern world, .. like expecting the Amish to 
learn Break Dancing...


--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple