Follow-up Comment #7, bug #13432 (project mc):
I also think that those complaints are reasonable, but I don't understand what
this has to do with anything ?! :)
So far, if I've read the discussion correctly, I've understand that you also
agree that both lchown() and chown() have to be used - depending on the task
that has to be performed. So do you still think mc_lchown() is wrong ? If so -
why do you think so ?
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?func=detailitem&item_id=13432>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via/by Savannah
http://savannah.gnu.org/
_______________________________________________
Mc-devel mailing list
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/mc-devel
