Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2001 15:38:11 -0400 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: setup 2.78.2.13 Message-ID: <20011022153811.B10718@redhat.com> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: <3BD472EC DOT 7070401 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3BD472EC.7070401@ece.gatech.edu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.21i On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 03:26:36PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote: >setup 2.78.2.13 (the one currently distributed from the www.cygwin.com >page) seems to create all files (on NTFS/CYGWIN=ntsec) with permissions of >700. For instance, I just installed the new vesion of cygrunsrv, and the >following files now have "bad" perms: > >-rwx------ /etc/setup/cygrunsrv.lst.gz >-rwx------ /etc/setup/installed.db >-rwx------ /etc/setup/installed.db.old >-rwx------ /usr/doc/Cygwin/cygrunsrc.README >-rwx------ /usr/bin/cygrunsrv.exe > >Now, a simple tar tvjf of the tarball shows: > >-rwxr-xr-x corinna/root bin/cygrunsrv.exe >-rw-r--r-- corinna/root usr/doc/Cygwin/cygrunsrv.README > >Is it possible that a permission/ntsec related fix from the trunk didn't >make it into the branched version of setup? It's entirely possible that if no one installed the patch on the branch that it is not on the branch, yes. *I* didn't apply any patches on the branch, FWIW. cgf -- 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/