[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Eric Blake) writes:
> Other questions, though - with our extension options, should we interpret
> `chmod -w a+x foo' the same as `chmod -- -w ./a+x ./foo' or like
> `chmod -- -w,a+x ./foo'?
It's been the former for a while; I guess that's OK.
> POSIX allows modes that look lik
> This is a common trap for novices to fall into, and I think it'd be
> better if chmod diagnosed the mistake, in addition to performing the
> requested action. I just checked POSIX, and it allows "chmod" to
> diagnose errors like "chmod -w file" so I installed the following
> patch.
It took me a
For quite some time I've been annoyed that "chmod -w file" can leave
the file writeable afterwards, if your umask is restrictive. You're
supposed to use "chmod a-w file" if you really want the file to be
unwriteable.
This is a common trap for novices to fall into, and I think it'd be
better if ch
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
According to Pierre A. Humblet on 5/2/2005 9:22 PM:
> According to the Cygwin Faq,
>
> *
> Why doesn't `mkdir -p' work on a network share?
> Unfortunately, you cannot do something like this:
>
> bash$ mkdir -p //MACHINE/Share/path/to/new/dir
