Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: cvs via Cygwin (W98) to FAT to Linux - permissions
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 12:32:44 +1000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.4417.0
Message-ID: <EA18B9FA0FE4194AA2B4CDB91F73C0EF08F0AE@itdomain002.itdomain.net.au>
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic: cvs via Cygwin (W98) to FAT to Linux - permissions
Thread-Index: AcD/eaRwjsUvg7h4SvOgfjtaBJo8lQAAIYfA
From: "Robert Collins" <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>
To: <jorgens AT coho DOT net>, "Cygwin List (E-mail)" <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id WAA10025

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steve Jorgensen [mailto:jorgens AT coho DOT net]
> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 12:34 PM
> To: Cygwin List (E-mail)
> Subject: RE: cvs via Cygwin (W98) to FAT to Linux - permissions
> 
> 
> It seems to me there are some big potential dangers to a 
> Cygwin UMSDOS 
> implementation.  The main issue is that UMSDOS expects that 
> it is the only 
> thing that will be modifying anything in a synchronized 
> directory while it 
> is mounted.  I don't think this can conceivably be enforced inside a 
> running Windows session short of holding locks on every single file.

I'm to quite sure what you mean here. Cygwin1.dll will be providing the
only access to the files in the UMSDOS system, so syncronisation
shouldn't be an issue. Sure someone deleting a file out from within a
win32-only program could cause confusion, but thats not a UMSDOS only
issue :}.

Could you clarify a little?
 
> That brings me back to the more limited, but vastly simpler 
> idea of adding 
> a feature to cvs that allows producing a script of chmod 
> commands during 
> check-out that reflects the proper file permissions.  I might 
> even attempt 
> this myself after re-learning such things as how a make file 
> works since I 
> haven't done C programming in about 12 years now.

sounds to me a like a cvs status might be enough for you.

Rob

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/