> I get confused between chmods "u" for 'owner' not 'user', and "o" for 'user' > not 'owner'! > > I can go for months working in my multi-user apps without having to change > any file perms or doing much else in the OS (I love the reliability) - but > when I do come to do something I struggle to remember many commands. This is > made worse when there is such ambiguity in a command that has such > importance for security. I often find I've entered 'chmod u...' thinking I > was changing 'user' perms.
But 'chmod u...' would be changing user permissions! So it sounds to me like you are doing what you said you wanted. For example: chmod u+w file > I know the u/g/o options are part of the cherished heritage, and no doubt to Actually u/g/o are the new-fangled way of doing things. The traditional method would be to use the octal mappings of bits to file modes. But that breaks down when you don't have an exact match to some filesystems. Using symbolic names allows filesystems to do some mapping to make appropriate choices. It allows incrementally changing bits. Here is the 'cherished heritage' method, deprecated. chmod 0644 file > most professionals this is a non-issue, but in the interests of furthering > the wider usage and popularity of *nix, is there any possibility that a > change could be considered ? eg:- > > 'o' for owner > 'g' for group > 'e' for 'everyone else' Or how about: 'm' for me 't' for my team 'w' for the world Obviously I am having some fun here. Sorry about that. I could not resist. As you can see there are endless different ways to split that up. Is User, Group, Other really so bad? > This could be done in two stages:- > a) introduce the new 'e' = 'everyone else' option and depracate 'o' for > 'other users' > b) later, after a period of adjustment, re-introduce 'o' for 'owner' and > depracate 'u'. Since they are still in the process of converting away from the numbers and over to the symbolic names I think you will find it an uphill battle to get people to change yet again. And besides, to me anyway, the names user, group, other really makes more sense to me than owner, group, everyone. Blech. :-) Bob _______________________________________________ Bug-fileutils mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-fileutils
