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:to:subject:message-id:reply-to
	:references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; q=dns; s=
	default; b=Ehlll0zpx0fhlbqghsJNZo4Tv2B9jwA4ZogUNxop5KacKt5Fjs6XN
	9o122tJSdgyhxQ5473CvCoN2kpxOWwOh03XdZaJ/s3Y0jPzZnmh/KC3Uz6OsAlBw
	Ctor6ZYVqRNbwQjQCoozDpMewjOHYa7lu+EwbAqH/+XTOGt35j57F0=
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2015 16:52:23 +0200
From: Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin@cygwin.com>
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] TEST RELEASE: Cygwin 2.0.0-1
Message-ID: <20150411145223.GK7343@calimero.vinschen.de>
Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
References: <e0dc59a93e73f1f16999723c13dc1d85.squirrel@webmail.xs4all.nl>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="v2Uk6McLiE8OV1El"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <e0dc59a93e73f1f16999723c13dc1d85.squirrel@webmail.xs4all.nl>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)

--v2Uk6McLiE8OV1El
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Henri,

On Apr 11 15:25, Houder wrote:
> Hi Corinna,
>=20
> Reference: https://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2015-04/msg00201.html
>  - [ANNOUNCEMENT] TEST RELEASE: Cygwin 2.0.0-1

I really appreciate bug reports, but, please, try to keep the threading
intact.  Please reply to mails rather than creating new threads which
have no connection to the original threads.  Or if so, at least set the
"In-Reply-To:" Header field correctly.

By additionally changing the subject you're making searching the
archives unnecessarily hard for others.  I changed the subject back.

> Sorry, Corinna, but I have to ask: will this be the correct behaviour of =
Cygwin
> from now on? ... because I am very much surprised ...

It's what we haxxers call "a bug".  I made a typo in another function,
copy-pasted the code over to the chmod function, fixed it in the
original function and then forgot to fix it in chmod.

Btw., the output from SetACL isn't that helpful, because it doesn't
add information to what icacls already delivers.  What I'd be more
interested in is the output of our own getfacl in conjunction with
icacls.  It allows me to see the POSIX ACL the internal ACL reading
routine created from the Windows ACL.

I just uploaded a new test release 2.0.0-0.2.  It's supposed to fix
this bug.  Give it a bit of time to hit the mirrors.


Thanks,
Corinna

--=20
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

--v2Uk6McLiE8OV1El
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
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=xF4L
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--v2Uk6McLiE8OV1El--