Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
X-Authentication-Warning: localhost.localdomain: ronald owned process doing -bs
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 15:40:10 +0100 (CET)
From: Ronald Landheer-Cieslak <ronald AT landheer DOT com>
X-X-Sender: ronald AT localhost DOT localdomain
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: NTEA extensions for uid/gid
In-Reply-To: <20030127140935.GT2117@cygbert.vinschen.de>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0301271534450.8939-100000@localhost.localdomain>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

On Mon, 27 Jan 2003, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 02:30:35PM +0100, Ronald Landheer-Cieslak wrote:
>> In any case, seeing the behaviour of the exec-permission bits, I have a 
>> "wouldn't it be nice if...": wouldn't it be nice if the executable 
>> permission bits would actually correspond to the executability
>> of a file? I mean, an explorer-created empty file is definitely not
>> executable - notably because it's empty.
> With ntsec on, stat() and friends report the permission bits set in
> the ACL.  I wouldn't want to see anything else.  The code using the
> mount info is only used when ntsec is off.
OK, thanx for the clarity :)

rlc


--
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/