DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 delorie.com 63KKZtjs158852
Authentication-Results: delorie.com; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=cygwin.com
Authentication-Results: delorie.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cygwin.com
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 delorie.com 63KKZtjs158852
Authentication-Results: delorie.com;
	dkim=pass (1024-bit key, unprotected) header.d=cygwin.com header.i=@cygwin.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=lLEDXoxT
X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 6E1A54CD203E
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cygwin.com;
	s=default; t=1776717354;
	bh=kEThQt7dki+OdY4Wp27/9OxA0POztVobTQSzhHrhzvA=;
	h=Date:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe:
	 List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:Cc:
	 From;
	b=lLEDXoxTzrMt/mEAepAZXgGzGI9j/o0w0fo3GOtx8nGgAICkXOtaRRmtIG+1Tg1uz
	 5zuo/r1F4lbp6XsjAvmx/wpQqJxNCZhyx768AL5usJLyyrC7a/OJQtiZGgkFfijFl5
	 WV2MRrUPw7mnAS9fj/LTEZzwer5GnFUwYKGTF04E=
X-Original-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 2A1334BA2E3C
ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org 2A1334BA2E3C
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1776717304; cv=none;
 b=ppn844MtmbRT1w5yOG0L4wY13q+yN8p6xYdoLdLsXzq/o78MPDx/FzJmzVkYqslqSMNRGm0I/vVGJTQvo+6CcbXjIUjTO91Zy1n7F6y0WQ0CwV/p2IjcquO8YHcUxBc4rNXG+RENAdBuATSZftN2lDg8aggwT5t6WJY7dssDIEs=
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key;
 t=1776717304; c=relaxed/simple;
 bh=wndVNkNRUfEMzprA1IkEjVC4sQnkQr9rCwLZaJEpl5Q=;
 h=DKIM-Signature:Date:From:Message-ID:To:Subject:MIME-Version;
 b=u67n38FV688rIYdDPjFKXAyy0HjdeafpA27UlU/LM996BioKH63oUMxfC7GxBSJ9RzowNxz352kOD+4PhEAWxuDTfzBB1oQxKi4oYJEUI3R61WcaMr67w/1Kq2hdBgsXtTbmS+vYtH1wjigaXTDpCVGHxYgihjJ5m/5Ufz3yaDM=
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 2A1334BA2E3C
X-Yandex-Fwd: 1
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2026 23:20:22 +0300
X-Mailer: The Bat! (v11.4.3) Home
Message-ID: <232390672.20260420232022@yandex.ru>
To: Corinna Vinschen via Cygwin <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>, cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Unexpected "setfacl: illegal acl entries"
In-Reply-To: <aeYkwLMJA7DAo1Ly@calimero.vinschen.de>
References: <103818205 DOT 20260420013503 AT yandex DOT ru>
 <aeYkwLMJA7DAo1Ly AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.30
Precedence: list
List-Id: General Cygwin discussions and problem reports <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://cygwin.com/mailman/options/cygwin>,
 <mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://cygwin.com/mailman/listinfo/cygwin>,
 <mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=subscribe>
From: Andrey Repin via Cygwin <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Cc: Andrey Repin <anrdaemon AT yandex DOT ru>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: cygwin-bounces~archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com
Sender: "Cygwin" <cygwin-bounces~archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>

Greetings, Corinna Vinschen via Cygwin!

> On Apr 20 01:35, Andrey Repin via Cygwin wrote:
>> Greetings, All!
>> 
>> I'm receiving this unexpected message when trying to edit the directory ACL:
>> 
>> >> [C:\Programs\Cygwin\bin]$ setfacl -m user::rx .
>> >> setfacl: illegal acl entries
>> 
>> But then I'm trying this
>> 
>> >> [C:\Programs\Cygwin\bin]$ setfacl -m user::r-x .
>> 
>> and it succeed.
>> 
>> To the all of my knowledge, ACL bits can be specified in any set or order.
>> 
>> Even the `setfacl -m user::wXr` command is correct.

> Our setfacl doesn't support that yet. It was originally designed after
> the description of the Solaris setfacl and the man page of that didn't
> mention that the perms can be in any order.  Just reading the Linux man
> page and it, too, doesn't mention that an arbitrary order is ok.  To my
> knowledge there's also no actual standard defining the exact way how
> setfacl operates.

> Our setfacl doesn't support 'X' yet.  Actually I just read about it for
> the first time :}

Neither *NIX does.
It just reads the bits caseless until the end of the block.
Very simple, fool- and future-proof.

> I add that to my TODO list, but don't expect anything for 3.6 at all,
> and for 3.7 any time soon.

> As always, patches to the cygwin-patches maling list are, of course,
> welcome.

If only I could. I always contribute where I can.


-- 
With best regards,
Andrey Repin
Monday, April 20, 2026 23:15:43

Sorry for my terrible english...


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