Mail Archives: cygwin-developers/2002/10/22/16:31:20
On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 04:20:04PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 03:47:31PM -0400, Pierre A. Humblet wrote:
>>Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>> The same person who chided me was indicating that setup.exe was somehow
>>> creating files that were incorrect or that cygwin was unable to execute
>>> files with .exe extensions. I don't really understand what's going on.
>>
>>The "incorrect" may be from the absent -d
>>I don't understand the non executable .ex, although an "ls -l" that
>>does not show the x is understandable.
>
>I guess I have to look at the code. A file with a .exe extension is
>supposed to be executable by default. It should even show up as -x.
Nope. I was wrong. If ntsec is active then it has complete control.
I sort of like this since it is like linux but since setup.exe won't
properly extract files with the executable bit turned on, I guess I
have to override this.
I guess I have to do the same thing for '#!' magic too, right? Ugh.
There goes a big ntsec advantage.
cgf
- Raw text -