Pádraig Brady wrote:
> Yes I agree that the change is required.
> I've tweaked it so that the geteuid() syscall is only called
> if readonly files. Also I removed the error message on chmod failure
> as the user will still get an error message _if_ the copy_xattr fails.
> Also I ran it through indent and did s/write access rights/write access/.
> I'll push it soon if there are no objections.

Thanks for word tweaks and other patch-amending. I spotted one error -
initial value of access_changed was not changed to false when you
changed the name and logic from access_unchanged (fixed by attached
patch).

Greetings,
         Ondřej
From a4aee231c48e1cb80e63762fd65b6d09f4936bb2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: =?utf-8?q?Ond=C5=99ej=20Va=C5=A1=C3=ADk?= <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2009 08:57:43 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] cp: fix initial value of access_changed variable

* src/copy.c (copy_reg): fix initial value of access_changed variable
---
 src/copy.c |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/src/copy.c b/src/copy.c
index ad2060b..b7d113f 100644
--- a/src/copy.c
+++ b/src/copy.c
@@ -839,7 +839,7 @@ copy_reg (char const *src_name, char const *dst_name,
      by xattr_permission() in fs/xattr.c of the GNU/Linux kernel tree.  */
   if (x->preserve_xattr)
     {
-      bool access_changed = true;
+      bool access_changed = false;
 
       if (!(sb.st_mode & S_IWUSR) && geteuid() != 0)
         access_changed = fchmod_or_lchmod (dest_desc, dst_name, 0600) == 0;
-- 
1.5.6.1.156.ge903b

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Toto je digitálně podepsaná část zprávy

Reply via email to