X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 11:32:15 +0100 From: Corinna Vinschen To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: 1.7.1-1 noacl on samba share has incorrect directory write bit Message-ID: <20100108103215.GB27916@calimero.vinschen.de> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: <4B454550 DOT 9020806 AT fastmail DOT fm> <4B454E96 DOT 7060009 AT cygwin DOT com> <4B45739C DOT 4060807 AT fastmail DOT fm> <20100107180214 DOT GP23972 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <4B462AFD DOT 8030809 AT fastmail DOT fm> <20100107195022 DOT GQ23972 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <4B463D68 DOT 1070906 AT fastmail DOT fm> <20100107200946 DOT GR23972 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <4B46431E DOT 7050101 AT fastmail DOT fm> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4B46431E.7050101@fastmail.fm> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) 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 On Jan 7 15:25, Raman Gupta wrote: > On 01/07/2010 03:09 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > >I'm talking about the other case. The DOS R/O flag has nothing to do > >with writability of a directory in the first place. If we treat a > >directory as non-writable just because the DOS R/O flag is set, we're > >making a mistake with consequences. The consequences in the opposite > >case are much less problematic. > > Right -- which is why I suggested gating this using a "dro/nodro" > attribute so that it could be turned on by users of noacl samba > mounts where it would be correct to turn it on -- I suspect noacl > samba mounts are widely used and would benefit greatly from this as > EACCES would be correctly returned in many situations in which it > currently isn't. Show me an example. The actual permissions are so that your actions already return EACCES. I don't see lots of a win which would rectify another mount option. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat -- 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