On Apr 11 14:35, David Macek wrote:
> On 11. 4. 2015 11:59, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >> Out of curiosity, does the code somehow distinguish ACLs that don't
> >> have these default permissions (or have different permissions set for
> >> SYSTEM / Administrators)?
> > 
> > I don't quite understand the question.
> > 
> > For a start, I'd like to point out how POSIX ACLs are supposed to work.
> > http://linux.die.net/man/5/acl is a good start.  This is our role model.
> 
> I'm gonna read that.
> 
> >   The new code will compute the mask the same way as before, but it
> >   skips the permissions of SYSTEM and Administrators while doing that.
> >   That means, the POSIX group permission bits are not affected by
> >   the Windows-typical permissions of SYSTEM and Administrators.
> > 
> >   Example:
> > 
> >     User            rw-
> >     Primary group   r--
> >     Other user      rw-
> >     Other group     r--
> >     SYSTEM          rwx
> >     Everyone        ---
> > 
> >   The computed POSIX MASK/CLASS_OBJ value in Cygwin 1.7.35 is the sum
> >   of all group and secondary user permissions
> > 
> >     rw- | r-- | rwx == rwx
> > 
> >   The new code ignores SYSTEM, thus the mask is
> > 
> >     rw- | r-- == rw-
> >      
> > Does this explain it sufficiently?
> 
> Yes, thank you. My question was about the case where SYSTEM or
> Administrator doesn't have the typical permissions. From this
> explanation, I assume that I won't be able to see any difference in
> the mask in that case, but it doesn't seem to be a bad thing.

I'm seriously hoping so.


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat