Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , 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 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: 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/