X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:from:to:subject:references:date:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:content-type; q=dns; s=default; b=xizVO duOn1yJYi0mN6zrWt7/UyNVExIanyf5txKFXjs/EDwZFHpLt+2xebQDcc+0jJ1um v/Obf8oURcdn7gzFUjwBiWsvkpSqVeRIahSYh7xU/ZAEWRbSyI5fh99RCYK/s/xN Ubk+JPaH5rDQjnbIT8Au7It85YA8Mg+NeJBURY= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:from:to:subject:references:date:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:content-type; s=default; bh=/WZVtpkHiIQ DMHDkKaXu1OMTy5M=; b=yyppkFBxmyeDUXTT1tooEew6biJjeOXL2iqOsb9fxAV /ABErsK9sxqU9boCOZo72jkmlx1VTA6kpostw9v+uG1dxF7U+NQcr9A7dMgN7Xcw GN7rhyUPoLj/TIxOXjqF81r9czTzKj1LyObiq8jfec2OcxpPfWAlfXLTdBmZlNMM = Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Id: 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 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mail-in-05.arcor-online.net X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.2 mail-in-06.arcor-online.net 3kzjGj6cp7z8Fgy From: Achim Gratz To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Updated: Cygwin 1.7.35-1 References: <54FABECF DOT 3070701 AT towo DOT net> Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 11:48:42 +0100 In-Reply-To: <54FABECF.3070701@towo.net> (Thomas Wolff's message of "Sat, 07 Mar 2015 10:03:11 +0100") Message-ID: <87pp8lozg5.fsf@Rainer.invalid> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Thomas Wolff writes: > This may happen on Linux as well. Just tested on a NAS runnig Debian, > in a "share" partition: In that case you've explicitly cleared the filemodes for the owner of the file. I'm talking about a case where the file access is purely based on ACL, there are no ACL for the owner SID and Cygwin basically creates those owner filemodes out of thin air. >> So in that situation the group permissions need to be promoted to the owner permissions. > I see no need to be more posixly here than other POSIX systems. The owner modes are always explicitly set for POSIX systems and become the u::+++, g::+++ and o::+++ base entries in the ACL. The ACL check algorithm gives these base entries absolute precedence over everything else for compatibility with systems that don't have ACL, so if euid==owner or egid==group no further entries in the ACL are ever checked. On Windows, the ACL are processed differently, which means that to do a correct translation of Windows ACL into POSIX ACL Cygwin must compute the base entries (and the filemodes) from the underlying full ACL, otherwise the apparent (via POSIX applications) and the effective (via Windows) access rights become different. And yes, that means that in some situations the POSIX file modes can change when the Windows ACL are changing, while this is not possible on POSIX systems. Regards, Achim. -- +<[Q+ Matrix-12 WAVE#46+305 Neuron microQkb Andromeda XTk Blofeld]>+ Samples for the Waldorf Blofeld: http://Synth.Stromeko.net/Downloads.html#BlofeldSamplesExtra -- 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