Date: Sat, 09 Jun 2001 14:53:39 +0300
From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sender: halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To: Martin Str|mberg <ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
Message-Id: <1438-Sat09Jun2001145339+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
X-Mailer: Emacs 20.6 (via feedmail 8.3.emacs20_6 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9
CC: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <200106090909.LAA26071@mother.ludd.luth.se> (message from Martin
	Str|mberg on Sat, 9 Jun 2001 11:09:22 +0200 (MEST))
Subject: Re: .files on servers are perceived as readonly
References:  <200106090909 DOT LAA26071 AT mother DOT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

> From: Martin Str|mberg <ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
> Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2001 11:09:22 +0200 (MEST)
> 
> > Why do you think these attributes shouldn't be mapped to readonly?
> 
> Because there's a readonly attribute. If you want a file readonly you
> set this attribute not the SYSTEM or HIDDEN bits.

So you are saying that a file with a HIDDEN or SYSTEM attribute set
should look to a user of "ls -l" as a normal file?  How would that
user then guess the reason for the strange behavior she observes when
DOS commands and functions are invoked on those files?

In other words, the write bit in the Posix mode bits was the only way
`stat' could relate to a program that such files are special.  It's
not a bad approximation, given how many years it works without
complaints.

Could you please explain what exactly is wrong with that?  Why did it
annoy you that .cvsignore was shown as not writable?

> > ls --version
> ls (GNU fileutils) 4.0
> > ls -agl v:/martin/djgpp/djgpp/src/libc/.cvsignore
> -h----        60 Jun  5 21:14 v:/martin/djgpp/djgpp/src/libc/.cvsignore
> 
> It's probably samba that maps .files to hidden as they are hidden in
> the Unix sense if they start with ".".

Probably.

> By the way there seems to be a bug here (it's my own compiled ls so
> perhaps not the latest):
> 
> > ls -agl v:/martin/djgpp/djgpp/src/libc/
> total 0
> ----d-        96 Jun  8 23:10 cvs
> 
> Is it supposed to bahave like that?

Like what?  What is the problem you refer to?

> Plus a bug in the docs. They say "The '-g' option is accepted but
> ignored, for compatiblity with Unix." in the ls node.

I guess Richard didn't remember to update the docs ;-)

(The old port of Fileutils 3.16 mentioned this in djgpp/README, but
the new README.dos doesn't.)