| delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
| 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: | <3E6F8112.7060301@ntlworld.com> |
| Date: | Wed, 12 Mar 2003 18:48:50 +0000 |
| From: | Mark Ovens <parish AT ntlworld DOT com> |
| User-Agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4a) Gecko/20030305 Netscape6/6.5 |
| X-Accept-Language: | en-gb, en-us |
| MIME-Version: | 1.0 |
| CC: | cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
| Subject: | Re: SOLVED: Re: SHELL on W2K (gmake 3.79.1) is cmd.exe not /bin/sh |
| References: | <1CA079E0A10FD7119DC20002A544C5BE553BDC AT eesusciexs3 DOT eesus DOT jnj DOT com> <3E6F64BB DOT 2060605 AT ntlworld DOT com> <015201c2e8ba$8c21c660$78d96f83 AT pomello> <3E6F7E38 DOT 8030409 AT ntlworld DOT com> <02e701c2e8c7$065f4cc0$78d96f83 AT pomello> |
| In-Reply-To: | <02e701c2e8c7$065f4cc0$78d96f83@pomello> |
Max Bowsher wrote:
> Mark Ovens wrote:
>> Max Bowsher wrote:
>>> Get him to run "ls -l /bin/sh" and also "id" and send the output
>>> here.
>>>
>>
>> /bin/sh.exe had no perms set (and neither did anything else in /bin)
>>
>> I did a ''chmod 000 /bin/sh.exe'' on my system and got the same
>> problem.
>>
>> I had checked with him early on that sh was executable, but by running
>> it from the command line, and it worked. Just to test this I tried
>> myself:
>>
>> marder-1:~{32}$ ls -l /bin/sh.exe
>> -rwx------+ 1 marko None 69632 Jul 31 2002 /bin/sh.exe
>> marder-1:~{33}$ chmod 000 /bin/sh.exe
>> marder-1:~{34}$ ls -l /bin/sh.exe
>> ----------+ 1 marko None 69632 Jul 31 2002 /bin/sh.exe
>> marder-1:~{35}$ /bin/sh
>> \h:\w{\#}$ exit
>> marder-1:~{36}$
>>
>> That shouldn't work, surely? Without the execute bit set it should
>> throw a "Command not found" or similar.
>
> This weirdness arises due to the difficulties in mapping ACLs to Unix
> permission bits. (Actually, the very latest, just released, not yet on all
> the mirrors, version 1.3.21 of cygwin has an improvement relating to this.)
>
Thanks for the explanation, that's useful to know. In future I'll check
the perms rather than just try running from the command line when
testing for executableness.
Regards,
Parish
>
> Max.
>
>
--
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/
| webmaster | delorie software privacy |
| Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |