From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from forward104j.mail.yandex.net (forward104j.mail.yandex.net [IPv6:2a02:6b8:0:801:2::107]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6AF68385E01E for ; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 16:05:05 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 6AF68385E01E Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=yandex.ru Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=anrdaemon@yandex.ru Received: from mxback8o.mail.yandex.net (mxback8o.mail.yandex.net [IPv6:2a02:6b8:0:1a2d::22]) by forward104j.mail.yandex.net (Yandex) with ESMTP id 6CC774A0E6F; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 19:05:02 +0300 (MSK) Received: from sas1-e00c2743cdb8.qloud-c.yandex.net (sas1-e00c2743cdb8.qloud-c.yandex.net [2a02:6b8:c14:3a22:0:640:e00c:2743]) by mxback8o.mail.yandex.net (mxback/Yandex) with ESMTP id e1W3ALkY5S-52TSXTd9; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 19:05:02 +0300 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yandex.ru; s=mail; t=1585325102; bh=+T8k7Y/n6T5+ZTd5ubzsZjVH0tR7vAyAYHWmp3rx/zQ=; h=In-Reply-To:Subject:To:Reply-To:From:Message-ID:References:Date; b=X2gviUK2WiV4lRysXh7lP5YCqHEaePslTT/bjE1iO5AcGxAQGIiRX+YDlPFqboYrY vPif6r3uLp+r+nTPKzt6EMAv0JX6bYU/iEimXje1gItCIi+DKPLO3CyijdNEMGZjE3 V74OQpNqwjj3F7jnxtybZfWskcfCrBh82K1lTYKc= Authentication-Results: mxback8o.mail.yandex.net; dkim=pass header.i=@yandex.ru Received: by sas1-e00c2743cdb8.qloud-c.yandex.net (smtp/Yandex) with ESMTPSA id y43JXz9f7d-51W4ksMn; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 19:05:01 +0300 (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client certificate not present) Received: from [192.168.1.10] (HELO daemon2.darkdragon.lan) by daemon2 (Office Mail Server 0.8.12 build 08053101) with SMTP; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 16:00:12 -0000 Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2020 19:00:12 +0300 From: Andrey Repin X-Mailer: The Bat! (v6.8.8) Home Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <1627868663.20200327190012@yandex.ru> To: Kacper Michajlow , cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: ACL: Why SYSTEM doesn't have full access set on newly created files? In-Reply-To: References: <459837604.20200327125155@yandex.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, FREEMAIL_FROM, KAM_THEBAT, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: cygwin@cygwin.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Cygwin discussions and problem reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2020 16:05:08 -0000 Greetings, Kacper Michajlow! >> It is easily fixable by mounting directories outside Cygwin tree with >> "noacl" flag. >> It is even required to do so, if you expect interoperation between Cygwin >> and native tools. > Indeed, this is acceptable workaround for me. Then again it is not really > interoperable out of the box, even tho it may looks like. Interoperabily with native tools was never a stated goal of Cygwin project. Although it is trying to comply where possible. > I mean all Windows drives are mounted, you can easily jump through all > directories, mess with them until you find that it doesn't work and it is " > required" to access those files differently. One may be fooled by the > seemingly no boundary between Cygwin and Windows. I can agree that default /cygdrive mount options needs a revision. >> Don't do that on Cygwin directory tree, you break Cygwin doing this. > I was talking about project cloned outside Cygwin tree, by using Cygwin's > git. I do understand that Cygwin sysroot is it's own thing. > Also the Cygwin tree have let say "normal" permissions set. I mean there is > not deny on SYSTEM and so on. >> Answered multiple time in the last 20 years. Read the docs. > If it were so easy to find. And it was changed like 5 years ago how ACLs > are handled, so I really doubt it was described 20 years ago. I just wanted > to understand why SYSTEM described in Cygwin's docs as "A special account > which has all kinds of dangerous rights, sort of an uber-root account." > have those rights limited. If you find documentation incorrect or unclear, please ask any questions you have or suggest patches. >> They are in correct order. Just not canonical order, which Explorer only >> supports. > I was not implying they are in incorrect order... The question was, could > Cygwin apart from having permissions in correct order, have them in > Explorer compatible order also? As I said, if you fix /cygdrive mount options to include noacl flag, permissions control will be deferred to operating system. This will amend some of the interoperability issues. -- With best regards, Andrey Repin Friday, March 27, 2020 18:19:43 Sorry for my terrible english...