Mail Archives: cygwin/2005/08/22/16:26:44
On Aug 22 13:00, Shankar Unni wrote:
> Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>
> >use POSIX permissions with POSIX permission rules -> ntsec,
> > use Windows permissions with Windows permission rules -> nontsec
>
> Err, isn't that sort of a backwards terminology? When I see the word
> "ntsec", I read it as "use NT SECurity", vs. "NO NT SECurity" (i.e.
> something else, e.g. POSIX)..
>
> Perhaps the confusion might be reduced if the option were called
> posixsec or noposixsec..
Perhaps we just keep it as it is so not to break scripts and applications
which check for this option?
The original meaning is "make use of NT security" vs. "don't make use of
NT security". The view point is from the Cygwin code perspective which
uses NT security functions for permissions if ntsec is on, or doesn't
use any NT security stuff at all if ntsec is off.
Corinna
--
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat, Inc.
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
- Raw text -