Message-ID: <4A804DFD.6090609@dronecode.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 17:42:37 +0100
From: Jon TURNEY <jon.turney@dronecode.org.uk>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.1) Gecko/20090715 Thunderbird/3.0b3
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: Can't execute scripts from a samba share with 1.7
References: <h5cqnj$c9f$1@ger.gmane.org> <20090806142010.GE3204@calimero.vinschen.de> <h5f54a$nkt$1@ger.gmane.org>
In-Reply-To: <h5f54a$nkt$1@ger.gmane.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com

On 06/08/2009 18:50, Nahor wrote:
> Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> On Aug 5 13:40, Nahor wrote:
>>> If I mount with "noacl", I get a slightly different error but still
>>> no cigar:
>>> $ ./t.sh
>>> -bash: ./t.sh: /bin/sh: bad interpreter: Permission denied
>>> $
>> This only happens if your account doesn't have execute permissions for
>> the interpreter, in this case /bin/sh. Is it possible that /bin/sh.exe
>> has weird permission settings for some reason?
>
> The permissions on the interpreter are OK.
> $ ls -l /bin/sh
> -rwxr-xr-x 1 nahor Administrators 472064 Jul 1 18:20 /bin/sh
> $
>
> For that matter, scripts running off the local disk run fine.
>
> Looks like the same problem of inconsistent account ID, setting the
> permissions to 755 or running as the domain user fix the "bad
> interpreter" error.

I also have this problem in it's second (noacl) form.  With this mount

//necker/jon on /home/jon type smbfs (binary,exec,noacl,user)

running the t.sh test script fails in a directory on this mount

Jon@byron ~
$ ls -al t.sh
-rwxr-xr-x 1 Jon None 19 2009-08-06 15:46 t.sh

Jon@byron ~
$ ./t.sh
-bash: ./t.sh: /bin/sh: bad interpreter: Permission denied

but works fine in a different directory

Jon@byron ~
$ cp t.sh /

Jon@byron ~
$ cd /

Jon@byron /
$ ./t.sh
foo

Running .exe's from the share works fine.

I don't think I have the option of not using noacl, since this share resides 
on a LinkStation NAS which is running an old version of Samba (2.2.2 if google 
is to be believed) without acl support.

I'm pretty sure this used to work with Cygwin 1.5

 >> One weird thing though, the directory permission are 700 and yet I can
 >> list the content of the directory, cd in it and add/delete files. So
 >> permissions are not consistently checked. But then, I assume it's
 >> because all that is done by Windows/Samba while the permission check on
 >> the script is done by Cygwin? Same thing with executing binary (I was
 >> able to execute a binary file copied on the share even though I couldn't
 >> execute scripts)?
 >
 > Most of Cygwin relys on the permission checks of the underlying OS.
 > In case of scripts, that's not possible.  Therefore it has to check
 > script permissions explicitely.  Note that it doesn't do a simple
 > POSIX permission bit check, rather it calls an OS function asking
 > "does *this* account have the right to execute *that* file?"  That
 > should result in the most consistent behaviour, as far as Windows
 > consistency goes.

Forgive me if you've already explained the solution, but how then do I arrange 
for scripts on this share to be seen as executable?

--
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