X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.0 c=1 a=xe8BsctaAAAA:8 a=BP8Shh2C9tAsK89v_JcA:9  a=Ezscg_ccfUBMPgJl8mcA:7 a=vvKeY6c8eWGs1CegaqXCTCmYz4cA:4 a=eDFNAWYWrCwA:10  a=rPt6xJ-oxjAA:10
Message-ID: <47E711BE.2020608@byu.net>
Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 20:28:14 -0600
From: Eric Blake <ebb9 AT byu DOT net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.12) Gecko/20080213 Thunderbird/2.0.0.12 Mnenhy/0.7.5.666
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Building perl-5.10.0
References: <7634A226C4C245868140309A0F3A952F AT desktop2> 	 <2kap83p6s5819lu66sr6kmrem6o5iqm180 AT 4ax DOT com> 	 <56E5E10621694E4A860212458ECD1E1C AT desktop2> 	 <015b01c7bf20$a3d3e4a0$2e08a8c0 AT CAM DOT ARTIMI DOT COM> 	 <F3A6993B1B3741AD9B6A6D9688BB301D AT desktop2> <9ea6aaa80803172015i3adb46cq3af80a70fa7ff063 AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <AD1B0F102FEA451BB4C3CB6F44F0B9F5 AT desktop2> <47E5384E DOT 3070503 AT x-ray DOT at>
In-Reply-To: <47E5384E.3070503@x-ray.at>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
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

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

According to Reini Urban on 3/22/2008 10:48 AM:
| The second problem is the +, the special Windows ACL, which should not
| be here on a plain new cygwin installation.
| POSIX access() doesn't check the additional ACL's, just the underlying
| windows calls allow or deny access then. This can be right or this can
| be contradictive.

Actually, POSIX access() is allowed to honor the alternate permissions
provided by ACLs (ie. report nonzero for access(name,R_OK) even when none
of the traditional read bits are set, if some other mechanism like an ACL
or being an administrator allows read access to the file), and my
understanding is that cygwin's access() does just that.  However, there
are many apps which just use stat() rather than access(), and thus get
misinformation about whether they have access rights because they were
basing off of incomplete information.  POSIX also states that chmod(2) is
supposed to disable any ACLs that allow alternate access.

However, there is still a known issue that in cygwin, all directories
currently show with a '+' when listed by ls, even when all that is present
on the directory is the ACL for default ACLs to be used when creating
files in that directory.

- --
Don't work too hard, make some time for fun as well!

Eric Blake             ebb9 AT byu DOT net
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Cygwin)
Comment: Public key at home.comcast.net/~ericblake/eblake.gpg
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkfnEb4ACgkQ84KuGfSFAYBdmQCfbadO2l1Z2Y07FvhTUbdo/nwv
rpgAn3cGaWKkPVyg9Q6GLzjDl4ydPxuf
=s2QG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
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/