On Sun, Nov 24, 2002 at 04:11:04PM -0500, Pierre A. Humblet wrote:
> There is another strange thing in there that I should have mentioned:
> we are returning success even if the user gives us an ACLU that's
> tohasmall. Is that how Sun does it?
Just checked. No, Solaris returns ENOSPC. I've fi
At 08:02 PM 11/24/2002 +0100, you wrote:
>+ if (aclbufp) {
>+if (EqualSid (owner_sid, group_sid))
>+ lacl[0].a_perm = lacl[1].a_perm;
>+aclsort (pos, 0, aclbufp);
>+if (pos > nentries)
>+ pos = nentries;
> memcpy (aclbufp, lacl, pos * sizeof (__aclent16_t));
>- aclsort (
On Sun, Nov 24, 2002 at 11:28:17AM -0500, Pierre A. Humblet wrote:
> At 05:08 PM 11/24/2002 +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >The appropriate changes to sec_acl.cc would collide with your patch
> >so I'd like to ask you if you want me to make the necessary changes
> >to comply with Solaris first an
>
>I'm pretty sure it's related to setting myself->gid to the new
>DEFAULT_GID 401 in internal_getlogin. It's perhaps a problem of the
>execution order. However, I didn't look into the code so far since
>I'm busy with the sec_acl stuff.
>
I think his Windows user name isn't fergus. I will confirm
On Sun, Nov 24, 2002 at 05:12:42PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 24, 2002 at 05:08:05PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > - ...except for in the CLASS_OBJ entry. The default setting on that
> > machine for all my files is 0x1ff and, frankly, I have no idea
> > how to explain th
On Sun, Nov 24, 2002 at 11:28:17AM -0500, Pierre A. Humblet wrote:
> At 05:08 PM 11/24/2002 +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >The appropriate changes to sec_acl.cc would collide with your patch
> >so I'd like to ask you if you want me to make the necessary changes
> >to comply with Solaris first an
At 05:08 PM 11/24/2002 +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>The appropriate changes to sec_acl.cc would collide with your patch
>so I'd like to ask you if you want me to make the necessary changes
>to comply with Solaris first and then to send a revised patch, or
>if you want to incorporate these change
On Sun, Nov 24, 2002 at 05:08:05PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> - ...except for in the CLASS_OBJ entry. The default setting on that
> machine for all my files is 0x1ff and, frankly, I have no idea
> how to explain that setting. Interesting enough, the Solaris
> getfacl as well as my get
On Sun, Nov 24, 2002 at 09:21:20AM -0500, Pierre A. Humblet wrote:
> At 02:04 PM 11/24/2002 +0100, you wrote:
>
> Hi Corinna,
>
> First off I am going to look at the Win98 home directory problem
> reported on the list, if you have not fixed it already.
I couldn't. My VM struggled installing 98
At 02:04 PM 11/24/2002 +0100, you wrote:
Hi Corinna,
First off I am going to look at the Win98 home directory problem
reported on the list, if you have not fixed it already.
>Hi Pierre,
>
>a few comments:
>
>On Fri, Nov 22, 2002 at 09:54:32AM -0500, Pierre A. Humblet wrote:
>
>A formatting nit:
Hi Pierre,
a few comments:
On Fri, Nov 22, 2002 at 09:54:32AM -0500, Pierre A. Humblet wrote:
> static void
> getace (__aclent16_t &acl, int type, int id, DWORD win_ace_mask, DWORD win_ace_type)
> {
>acl.a_type = type;
>acl.a_id = id;
>
> - if (win_ace_mask & FILE_READ_DATA)
> + if
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>
> Could you please resend your mail with patch #2? It allows
> me to follow up simply.
Here it is, cut and pasted from the web site.
Pierre
***
Hello again, Corinna,
while stracing "ls -l" to verify the
On Fri, Nov 22, 2002 at 09:31:21AM -0500, Pierre A. Humblet wrote:
> Corinna,
>
> I am done with the next series of passwd/group patches
> to separate internal and external calls.
> They affect sec_acl.cc, thus we should probably discuss
> and finalize patch ntsec #2 before I send this one.
Could
Corinna,
I am done with the next series of passwd/group patches
to separate internal and external calls.
They affect sec_acl.cc, thus we should probably discuss
and finalize patch ntsec #2 before I send this one.
Pierre
14 matches
Mail list logo
