On Sat, 14 May 2016 18:23:10 +0200, hw wrote: > >> Using 'chmod -R g+w $#' isn't very appealing, and how safely does it > >> handle file names? > > > > What is unappealing about it? I've never had any problem with file > > names, but I don't use odd ones. You could quote the $@/$# just in > > case, although if there's no shell expansion taking place it > > shouldn't be necessary. > > Using 'chmod -R' is unappealing because changing access rights for > so-many-thousand or so directory-entries once per minute might
Why would you be running it every minute? > wear out the SSDs sooner than otherwise. It might make things > worse that the file system is that of a KVM VM residing in a sparse > file on these SSDs. > > And it may lead to confusion of the users when they suddenly can > write to files they couldn't write to a few seconds before. Chmod is run when files are created or modified, and only on those files. There is no timing involved, except for the fraction of a second it takes for incrond to receive and act upon the inotify message. -- Neil Bothwick Politics: Poli (many) - tics (blood sucking parasites)
pgp62SEwJSVKm.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
