Mail Archives: cygwin/2010/09/02/12:25:34
On 9/2/2010 10:05 AM, Vasya Pupkin wrote:
> If you read again very carefully, you will see that I modified
> permissions AFTER I noticed they were messed up. Ok?
I tried to point out that your definition of "messed up" is the opposite
of Andy's. To you, the default permissions provided by setup.exe are
messed up. To Andy, the permissions you created are messed up. I hope
that clarifies things.
> In my case, these additional permissions were allowing everyone to
> modify files. Not harmful at all, indeed. I do not remember all the
> details, I remember these permissions were everywhere. So I just
> replaced everything with proper permissions and disabled acl support
> in cygwin. The only problem was setup.exe but now I compiled it with a
> modification and this last problem gone.
Yes, the more I read, the more I come to believe that the disconnect
here is in the definition of correct and acceptable permissions. Your
definition differs from that of the Cygwin developers. It's good that
your permissions changes worked for you, but it's possible that they
won't work for everyone. A better description of your original problem
as well as how your proposed solution addresses that problem would allow
for a more productive discussion.
> I understand that I do not have all the details required for a bug
> report. And it wasn't an attempt to report a bug. I was asked why I
> care about permissions, so I answered. Anyway, the problem is solved
> now, I also submitted an easy patch to setup.exe source for everyone
> who want to get rid of this problem as well.
>
> If I ever get into a problem with permissions again, I will try to
> make a proper bug report instead of just fixing permissions.
Your answer was simply an assertion that there possibly was and may
still be something wrong with the permissions handling under Cygwin, but
that you also haven't confirmed that recently. The details really would
be helpful and likely necessary if you would like to have your patch
accepted by the maintainers of setup.exe.
The only other option is to independently maintain your patch and
rebuild your version of setup.exe any time the upstream version changes.
This won't help most users, though, because they will either not know
about your patch or not care to build their own setup.exe without having
any evidence of an existing problem and assurance that your change
doesn't introduce other problems.
If you're satisfied with your solution, so be it, but you could pretty
quickly gather the necessary details for a bug report by performing a
second installation of Cygwin into a new directory and reporting the
flawed permissions. That could lead to the acceptance of your patch or
something similar to the benefit of everyone.
-Jeremy
--
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
- Raw text -