Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@sourceware.cygnus.com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@sources.redhat.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@sources.redhat.com Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 12:28:17 -0500 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: CVS permissions problem with network drive Message-ID: <20001219122817.A8827@redhat.com> Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com References: <013901c06960$9ff3dd30$ad9560cb@workhorse> <20001218214202.A5253@redhat.com> <0012191352330A.28008@cygbert> <20001219111041.A8423@redhat.com> <3A3F911D.5CBF4066@ece.gatech.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.11i In-Reply-To: <3A3F911D.5CBF4066@ece.gatech.edu>; from cwilson@ece.gatech.edu on Tue, Dec 19, 2000 at 11:47:25AM -0500 On Tue, Dec 19, 2000 at 11:47:25AM -0500, Charles S. Wilson wrote: >Christopher Faylor wrote: >>Actually, shouldn't this be a mount option rather than a cygwin >>setting? In fact, maybe a >> >>mount -n c:\foo /foo # use NTSEC semantics >> >>would be sort of nice. > >Yes, it would. But, how would > >cp foo //bar/baz > >be handled? It would use the default or we could still use a CYGWIN environment variable. I just tried doing a 'mount //foo/bar //foo/bar' but that didn't work. >Besides, this is something you'd configure one way or the other for all >SMB shares -- either you're a domain user or you're not. So, it >probably shouldn't be set on a per-share or per-mount basis, but rather >it should be set globally for a particular user/installation. Isn't it possible that you could have different shares mounted from different systems with different requirements? That's why I was suggesting a mount option. cgf -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple