Barry Kelly wrote:
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
If that's not feasible, switch off ntsec and you get standard Windows
permissions. If the standard Windows permissions are not as you need
them, don't rely on Cygwin's chown/chmod. rather change the inheritence
settings of the parent directory accordi
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> If that's not feasible, switch off ntsec and you get standard Windows
> permissions. If the standard Windows permissions are not as you need
> them, don't rely on Cygwin's chown/chmod. rather change the inheritence
> settings of the parent directory according to your nee
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Nov 13 15:28, Larry Hall (Cygwin) wrote:
Barry Kelly wrote:
Larry Hall (Cygwin) wrote:
Barry Kelly wrote:
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
I, for one, use Cygwin not primarily as a POSIX emulation layer, but as
my main Windows user interface. IMHO in this situation, being p
On Nov 13 15:28, Larry Hall (Cygwin) wrote:
> Barry Kelly wrote:
>> Larry Hall (Cygwin) wrote:
>>> Barry Kelly wrote:
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
I, for one, use Cygwin not primarily as a POSIX emulation layer, but as
my main Windows user interface. IMHO in this situation, being pos
Barry Kelly wrote:
Larry Hall (Cygwin) wrote:
Barry Kelly wrote:
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
I, for one, use Cygwin not primarily as a POSIX emulation layer, but as
my main Windows user interface. IMHO in this situation, being posixly
correct is a handicap that Cygwin could do without, at the use
Larry Hall (Cygwin) wrote:
> Barry Kelly wrote:
> > Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >
> > I, for one, use Cygwin not primarily as a POSIX emulation layer, but as
> > my main Windows user interface. IMHO in this situation, being posixly
> > correct is a handicap that Cygwin could do without, at the user
Barry Kelly wrote:
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
No, it's not feasible. If you leave out the Everyone ACE, the
permissions are not POSIX-like anymore. Leaving out means that others
have no permissions at all. Not even to see the permissions. That's
not correct from a POSIX POV.
Even if others
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> No, it's not feasible. If you leave out the Everyone ACE, the
> permissions are not POSIX-like anymore. Leaving out means that others
> have no permissions at all. Not even to see the permissions. That's
> not correct from a POSIX POV.
> Even if others don't have rwx
On Nov 9 23:13, charles5687 wrote:
> Corinna Vinschen-2 wrote:
> > The real answer is: It can't be prevented and there are no plans to add
> > code to prevent it, since these read permissions are required to get
> > POSIX-like permissions.
>
> I'm not sure I follow. Does this mean there are no p
Corinna Vinschen-2 wrote:
>
> On Sep 29 18:52, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>
> The real answer is: It can't be prevented and there are no plans to add
> code to prevent it, since these read permissions are required to get
> POSIX-like permissions.
>
>
I'm not sure I follow. Does this mean there
Corinna Vinschen-2 wrote:
>
> On Sep 29 18:52, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>
> The real answer is: It can't be prevented and there are no plans to add
> code to prevent it, since these read permissions are required to get
> POSIX-like permissions.
>
>
I'm not sure I follow. Does this mean there
On Sep 29 18:52, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Sep 9 07:47, Barry Kelly wrote:
> > Unfortunately, Cygwin creates an ACE for the group Everyone, even with
> > umask 0077, or after chmod 0700 is applied. Specifically, this is what
> > it looks like using cacls:
> >
> > Everyone:
On Sep 9 07:47, Barry Kelly wrote:
> Unfortunately, Cygwin creates an ACE for the group Everyone, even with
> umask 0077, or after chmod 0700 is applied. Specifically, this is what
> it looks like using cacls:
>
> Everyone:(special access:)
> REA
Cygwin by default, tries to implement POSIX permissions using the NT ACL
system - fairly well described here:
http://cygwin.com/cygwin-ug-net/ntsec.html
The way this feature is implemented interacts poorly with Vista,
however. A previous mailing (with reply) on this list that tried to
describe
14 matches
Mail list logo
