Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID:	<20021103171047.32595.qmail@web14505.mail.yahoo.com>
Date:	Sun, 3 Nov 2002 09:10:47 -0800 (PST)
From:	amores perros <lifelines_3_0_18 AT yahoo DOT com>
Subject:	]Should ntsec & autotools work under XP prof ?
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
MIME-Version:	1.0

--- Below this line is a copy of the message.

 
   
Subject :    
Should ntsec & autotools work under XP prof ?  
   
Date :    
Sun, 03 Nov 2002 16:53:57 +0000  
   
As I have stock default security token in my "limited" account, 
and a stock cygwin distribution, AFAIK, and autotools is not 
compatible with ntsec on my system, I wonder if anyone else 
has it working ? 

That is, has anyone seen these three all work together ? 
  i) installation & use as a normal user 
ii) ntsec 
iii) autotools 


I ran the cygwin setup as my normal user, and when prompted, 
gave it credentials for an administrator. 


I deduce that the cygwin loader uses NT permissions to determine

whether I can run an executable, as all the executables in 
/user/bin list as 
   -rwx------ Administ None 
yet it still lets me run them, and in fact the NT permissions 
allow Users to Read&Execute. 

So I assume that this is a vagary of the ntsec mapping that 
the permissions are being displayed as not executable to users, 
and that this is not the reality of what the loader obeys. 

I guess that the -x shell test used in the autotools wrappers 
is actually implemented by looking at the unix permissions not
the 
NT permissions, and as the unix permissions are wrong (as
mentioned 
above) this is why the autotools wrappers fail. 

I don't know the architectural answer as to 
- should the -x shell test look at the real NT permissions 
or 
- should the unix permissions more realistically reflect the 
   NT permissions 
or 
- is it not possible to get the -x shell test correct for cygwin


Anyway, if anyone knows the answer to my compabitility curiosity

(autotools + ntsec + non-administrative user) 
or if this jogs any memories, I'd be curious to hear any
reactions. 

Cordially, 

Perry 


[I made a yahoo mail account, b/c the cygwin mail list
bounces email from hotmail, at least sometimes.)
 

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now
http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -