Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/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
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
From: Lasse <lasse AT yrk DOT dk>
Subject:  Re: ls when acl() is busy [was: ls slow on top-level directory]
Date:  Thu, 30 Jun 2005 20:24:06 +0200
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <da1cu3$psm$1@sea.gmane.org>
References:  <062820050324 DOT 16993 DOT 42C0C2EB00001A5B0000426122007610640A050E040D0C079D0A AT comcast DOT net>  <20050628083433 DOT GC5174 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de>  <42C14C94 DOT 2040809 AT byu DOT net>  <d9sa0v$va3$1 AT sea DOT gmane DOT org> <6 DOT 2 DOT 1 DOT 2 DOT 0 DOT 20050628175506 DOT 03c66920 AT pop DOT prospeed DOT net>
Mime-Version:  1.0
Content-Type:  text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding:  7bit
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317)
In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20050628175506.03c66920@pop.prospeed.net>
Cc: bug-coreutils AT gnu DOT org
X-IsSubscribed: yes

Larry Hall wrote:
> At 04:03 PM 6/28/2005, you wrote:
[SNIP]
>>IMO, it should be the other way around, i.e. no error but a '+' to
>>signify an ACL, for two reasons:
>>
>>1. Transperency. Since the UNIX permissions are emulated, one could
>>argue that all files should have the '+' displayed...
> 
> Traditional UNIX permissions have always been represented by "drwxrwxrwx"
> permission displays (yes, I know "s" and "t" are possible options in some
> of the above locations).  ACLs are just different kinds of permissions that
> don't obviously map into the traditional UNIX permissions.  UNIX permissions
> do not imply or require the use of ACLs so using a '+' for all files would 
> misleading.  Using '+' as you mentioned for all files displayed by Cygwin's
> 'ls' would actually make it less transparent, not more.

That's not what I meant. My point was that since all files (natively)
have ACLs, tt makes sense to assume that a locked file has an ACL.

>>2. Probability. If the file is busy there's good chance that the file
>>has an ACL.
> 
> Actually no.  It just means the file is locked.  As Corinna pointed out, 
> there is no distinction in Windows between the meta data and the file.
> If the file is locked, the meta data is too and vice versa.  So a locked
> file tells you nothing about the existence of ACLs on this file.

See my other post in this thread.

-- 
/Lasse


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/