On Apr 16 03:20, Ismail Donmez wrote:
> Corinna Vinschen-2 wrote
> > I just applied a patch which is supposed to handle this owner==group
> > scenario better.
> > 
> > In short, Cygwin will try to handle POSIX user and group permissions
> > separately, even if owner == group.  This is basically a fake as far
> > as the actual permissions of the account are concerned, but it allows
> > applications still to chmod to different user and group perms.  It
> > just *looks* different in the end.
> > 
> > The only restriction of this is that the POSIX user permissions are
> > always changed so that the user perms are >= the group perms in this
> > situation.  So this:
> > 
> >   chmod 460 foo
> > 
> > will be internally twisted into
> > 
> >   chmod 660 foo
> > 
> > 
> > I uploaded new developer snapshots to https://cygwin.com/snapshots/
> > and I'm just uploading a 2.0.0-0.5 test release with this change.
> 
> I tested the new test release (rm -rfd the cygwin installation and
> re-installed from scratch just to be sure), my original testcase with quilt
> and mutt works, BUT now when I run make install inside mutt source it
> complains that /usr/bin/install cannot change permissions on the destination
> executables.

Hmm, ok.  Off the top of my head I don't understand this.

> can post an easily reproducable error. Because running the same command
> myself gives no error whatsoever. I'll try to come up with a better report.

That would be nice.  A good start would be to know what permission mask
install is trying to set the destination to.  Maybe that sheds some light.


Thanks,
Corinna

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