X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
Date:	Tue, 17 Jul 2007 17:33:12 +0200
From:	Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: acl_trivial?
Message-ID:	<20070717153312.GI20662@calimero.vinschen.de>
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<469CC5CE DOT 1010007 AT byu DOT net>
Mime-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<469CC5CE.1010007@byu.net>
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.4.2.2i
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/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

On Jul 17 07:36, Eric Blake wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Coreutils would like to use acl_trivial(3) in ls(1), in order to more
> easily decide whether to print a trailing + in the mode section.
> 
> http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/819-2246/6n4i34qck?a=view

Huh?  The description is a bit wrong, isn't it?  Quote:

"A POSIX draft ACL is trivial if it has greater than MIN_ACL_ENTRIES. An
 NFSv4/ZFS-style ACL is trivial if it either has entries other than
 owner@, group@, and everyone@, has inheritance flags set, or is not
 ordered in a manner that meets POSIX access control requirements."

Looks like they missed to add a "not" twice...

> directories - currently, coreutils thinks that ALL directories have
> non-trivial ACLs, thanks to the 3 default:*:* entries making it so that
> there are more than MIN_ACL_ENTRIES associated with each directory; but in
> reality, it seems like this situation should qualify as trivial:
> 
> $ getfacl .
> # file: .
> # owner: eblake
> # group: None
> user::rwx
> group::r-x
> mask:rwx
> other:r-x
> default:user::rwx
> default:group::---
> default:other:---
> $ ls -ld .
> drwxr-xr-x+ 14 eblake None 0 Jul 14 22:27 .

There's a "... has inheritance flags set" in the above quoted paragraph.
And why is the above a trivial ACL but not

  $ getfacl .
  # file: .
  # owner: eblake
  # group: None
  user::rwx
  group::r-x
  mask:rwx
  other:r-x
  default:user::rwx
  default:group::r-x
  default:other:r-x

?  And what if the default entries are missing, is the directory then
suddenly non-trivial?  In other words, how do you decide over triviality
in case of Windows ACLs?  What's the exact rule you're thinking of?

OTOH, we didn't have complaints about the '+' for some time now so
people got used to it, apparently.  What's the actual gain of adding
this function?


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader          cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

--
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 -