DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:date:from:reply-to:message-id:to:subject
	:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type
	:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=default; b=o+Ft7S624FwwEsih
	7Dth6e/BcH77kWiwLpI7WlLkI5lM4YQaGUbOzWqwvI7N7xUEoNDjG8Ofz1Fj/488
	eOX+MKQlHrX2baG0GEM5cQ098NkWe7en4JVIPKEPV3pdCm9StNFqQ7clHuWx4zgh
	OKS8vuNsgaPcVgdpzW1ixtgmTJ0=
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 06:39:13 +0300
From: Andrey Repin <anrdaemon@yandex.ru>
Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Message-ID: <154114676.20150224063913@yandex.ru>
To: Warren Young <wyml@etr-usa.com>, cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: TEST RELEASE: Cygwin 1.7.35-0.3
In-Reply-To: <801DB7C4-3F66-468F-B786-0C7575897D98@etr-usa.com>
References: <20150220102927.GR26084@calimero.vinschen.de>   <6695-1424465180-282140@sneakemail.com>  <20150223111721.GH437@calimero.vinschen.de>  <9116-1424712152-918733@sneakemail.com>  <20150223174709.GB26549@calimero.vinschen.de>  <CAFrJEvNKjG6JSWk6w1HM2wtC-CEX_FJOYtsjaeY7o1XX2uWD=Q@mail.gmail.com>  <20150223201119.GX437@calimero.vinschen.de>  <801DB7C4-3F66-468F-B786-0C7575897D98@etr-usa.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Greetings, Warren Young!

>>> Is there any solution to solve the ssh problem ( including git etc)?
>> 
>> Does https://cygwin.com/faq/faq.html#faq.using.ssh-pubkey-stops-working
>> help?

> That information seems to be incomplete.

> I ran into similar problems here, and found that chmod 600 would give me
> mode 660 *if* the files were in my “Warren” group as well as owned by me, personally.

> I fixed it with chgrp None ~/.ssh/*

> It seems that chmod 600 is being interpreted as:

> 1. It’s owned by Warren, so +rw for him.

> 2. Oh, its primary group is Warren, too, so let’s inherit g+rw, too.

Nop, this is actually an issue of reading ACLs rather than setting them.
POSIX access bits do not expect interchangeability of users and groups.

> Sorry for not reporting it earlier.  I thought I had just de-weirded something local.


--
WBR,
Andrey Repin (anrdaemon@yandex.ru) 24.02.2015, <06:37>

Sorry for my terrible english...