The Wanderer wrote:
> By this, I meant that I think 'rm' should refuse permission to remove a
> particular hardlink to the file when there are multiple such hardlinks,
> just as I think it should when there is only one.
Hmm... That would be a completely different operating model. A valid
model c
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 06/08/2014 08:58 PM, Bob Proulx wrote:
> The Wanderer wrote:
>> Yes, moving a file affects only data stored in the directory node
>> which contains the file (and the directory node where the file is
>> being moved to, which may be the same one).
Chris Bannister writes:
> On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 04:45:37PM +0200, Filip wrote:
>>
>> Removing a directory entries no relation whatsoever to the permissions
>> of the file.
>
> Parse error! Does not compute! :)
>
> --
> "If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people
> w
On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 04:45:37PM +0200, Filip wrote:
>
> Removing a directory entries no relation whatsoever to the permissions
> of the file.
Parse error! Does not compute! :)
--
"If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people
who are being oppressed, and loving the pe
The Wanderer wrote:
> Bob Proulx wrote:
> > jimmy wrote:
>
> >>// --- remove (delete) a file owned by root, should not be
> >> allowed, but is allowed. Here, it says the file is 'read-only'
> >> so it warns about it, but of course "rm -f " would work, too:
> >
> > Why do you think it should
The Wanderer writes:
> On 06/05/2014 11:37 PM, Bob Proulx wrote:
>
>> jimmy wrote:
>
>>>// --- remove (delete) a file owned by root, should not be
>>> allowed, but is allowed. Here, it says the file is 'read-only'
>>> so it warns about it, but of course "rm -f " would work, too:
>>
>> Why d
Ahoj,
Dňa Fri, 06 Jun 2014 09:42:19 -0400 The Wanderer
napísal:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA512
>
> On 06/05/2014 11:37 PM, Bob Proulx wrote:
>
> > jimmy wrote:
>
> >>// --- remove (delete) a file owned by root, should not be
> >> allowed, but is allowed. Here, it say
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 06/05/2014 11:37 PM, Bob Proulx wrote:
> jimmy wrote:
>>// --- remove (delete) a file owned by root, should not be
>> allowed, but is allowed. Here, it says the file is 'read-only'
>> so it warns about it, but of course "rm -f " would work,
On 2014-06-06, wes wrote:
>
> OP, your experiments uncover an important feature of directory
> ownership: the "get off my lawn" property.
>
Don't you mean the "Get off my my property, Lon," property?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscri
On Thu, 5 Jun 2014, Bob Proulx wrote:
jimmy wrote:
Could anyone verify this "bug" I ran into, please? I don't know for
sure if it is the new kernel, or any combination of various packages
(pam, rm, mv...).
I see no bug here.
OP, your experiments uncover an important feature of directory
own
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 1:37 PM, Bob Proulx wrote:
>>$ rm -v /tmp/testing/newjunk1.txt
>> rm: remove write-protected regular file ‘/tmp/testing/newjunk1.txt’? y
>> removed ‘/tmp/testing/newjunk1.txt’
>
> Sure. Because tst1 owns /tmp/testing.
Aside: This is just a courtesy on behalf of rm. It
jimmy wrote:
> Could anyone verify this "bug" I ran into, please? I don't know for
> sure if it is the new kernel, or any combination of various packages
> (pam, rm, mv...).
I see no bug here.
>$ mkdir -p /tmp/testing/
>$ ls -altr /tmp | grep testing
> drwxr-xr-x 2 tst1 tst1 4096 Jun 5
On Thu, 2014-06-05 at 17:39 -0700, jimmy wrote:
> Problem description: With normal/common file permission usage, in a
> directory owned by non-root user, the user can rename or delete root-owned
> files using:
>
>/bin/mv
>/bin/rm
>
> Within such directory, that non-root user can also
Hello,
Could anyone verify this "bug" I ran into, please? I don't know for sure if it
is the new kernel, or any combination of various packages (pam, rm, mv...).
Thanks,
Jimmy
###-
Software version:
kernel 3.14.5
Debian sid
Problem description: With normal/common file perm
14 matches
Mail list logo
