On Apr 11 07:11, Bryan Berns wrote:
> >> >   That means, even if SYSTEM or Administrators have full access to the
> >> >   file, the POSIX permssion bits will not reflect that fact.  And while
> >> >   other users get access denied based on the mask value, SYSTEM and
> >> >   Administrators will never get access denied based on the mask.
> >>
> >> If you want to put this to better use in larger settings it would seem
> >> preferrable if it was possible to define a list of users to treat this
> >> way in fstab.
> >
> > Nope, sorry, no configuration for this.  Either it's handled without
> > any exception, or for SYSTEM only, or for SYSTEM+Admins.  But either
> > way, we're doing it the same way on every system.
> 
> Damn.  I was about to reply with Achim's exact same thought --- like a
> file in /etc with a list of SIDs.  I can empathize with Corinna's veto
> though -- having a hundred tweak-able settings in Cygwin is
> unmaintainable for the general populous.  I may apply a local patch to
> extend this ability myself because Cygwin has become rather unusable
> for users with home's on our network drives (given all the programs
> that attempt to do sanity checks on group perms).

I'd suggest to give the new ACL handling sa try first.  It might not
be as bad (anymore) as you think.

> That said, I appreciate what has been integrated --- it will help in
> several scenarios.  I will test the release this weekend.  Thanks for
> all the hard work!


Thank you,
Corinna

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