Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
From:	Corinna Vinschen <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Date:	Tue, 19 Dec 2000 20:47:18 +0100
X-Mailer:	KMail [version 1.1.99]
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<OF4452111B DOT B0F21FC3-ON862569B2 DOT 00610F4F AT mmm DOT com> <3A3F911D DOT 5CBF4066 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> <20001219122817 DOT A8827 AT redhat DOT com>
In-Reply-To:	<20001219122817.A8827@redhat.com>
Subject:	Re: CVS permissions problem with network drive
MIME-Version:	1.0
Message-Id:	<0012192047180J.28008@cygbert>
X-MIME-Autoconverted:	from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id OAA15631

On Tuesday 19 December 2000 18:28, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 19, 2000 at 11:47:25AM -0500, Charles S. Wilson wrote:
> >Christopher Faylor wrote:
> >>Actually, shouldn't this be a mount option rather than a cygwin
> >>setting?  In fact, maybe a
> >>
> >>mount -n c:\foo /foo    # use NTSEC semantics
> >>
> >>would be sort of nice.
> >
> >Yes, it would.  But, how would
> >
> >cp foo //bar/baz
> >
> >be handled?
>
> It would use the default or we could still use a CYGWIN environment
> variable.
>
> I just tried doing a 'mount //foo/bar //foo/bar' but that didn't
> work.
>
> >Besides, this is something you'd configure one way or the other for
> > all SMB shares -- either you're a domain user or you're not.  So,
> > it probably shouldn't be set on a per-share or per-mount basis, but
> > rather it should be set globally for a particular
> > user/installation.
>
> Isn't it possible that you could have different shares mounted from
> different systems with different requirements?  That's why I was
> suggesting a mount option.

That's a point. Nevertheless I will check in the global [no]smbntsec
option solution now. It's simple enough so that a later enhancement
using a mount option isn't hard at all.

Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Developer                                mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat, Inc.

--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -