X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Message-ID: <26226546.post@talk.nabble.com> Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2009 20:05:07 -0800 (PST) From: aputerguy To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Is there a fast way to get acl's for the whole filesystem (or chunk thereof) In-Reply-To: <26226433.post@talk.nabble.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <26222793 DOT post AT talk DOT nabble DOT com> <6fv6f5dgkrgi6baa9ghfjaqp7h9a3eq9pj AT 4ax DOT com> <26226433 DOT post AT talk DOT nabble DOT com> X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: 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 OK... one small problem. Every ~4500 lines and (70-80K characters), both of these methods omit the empty line between the getfacl stanzas. The skipped lines however don't occur at the same places in the two different methods. I assume it must be due to buffering of the long line input or something, but I would like to correct for it. Preferably correct it before it occurs rather than having to use some sed or perl magic to clean up the file afterward. Any suggestions? -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Is-there-a-fast-way-to-get-acl%27s-for-the-whole-filesystem-%28or-chunk-thereof%29-tp26222793p26226546.html Sent from the Cygwin list mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple