Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 08:00:34 -0400 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: _cygwin_S_IEXEC we hardly knew ye Message-ID: <20010508080034.A21811@redhat.com> Reply-To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com References: <20010508001315 DOT A4844 AT redhat DOT com> <20010508112507 DOT A16420 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.11i In-Reply-To: <20010508112507.A16420@cygbert.vinschen.de>; from vinschen@redhat.com on Tue, May 08, 2001 at 11:25:07AM +0200 On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 11:25:07AM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 12:13:15AM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: >> For 1.3.3, I am going to implement a "Don't check this directory for >> execute bits" option to mount. I'd like to have this on by default for >> smb drives. Does this sound like a good idea? > >It sounds like a good idea for users who know what's going on... You're kidding, right? cgf