From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 102480 invoked by alias); 17 May 2015 01:41:10 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Received: (qmail 102468 invoked by uid 89); 17 May 2015 01:41:09 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mail110.syd.optusnet.com.au Received: from mail110.syd.optusnet.com.au (HELO mail110.syd.optusnet.com.au) (211.29.132.97) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Sun, 17 May 2015 01:41:07 +0000 Received: from dimstar.local.net (c122-107-168-99.eburwd5.vic.optusnet.com.au [122.107.168.99]) by mail110.syd.optusnet.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id 058C3782E60 for ; Sun, 17 May 2015 11:41:03 +1000 (AEST) Received: (qmail 8426 invoked by uid 501); 17 May 2015 01:40:40 -0000 Date: Sun, 17 May 2015 07:44:00 -0000 From: Duncan Roe To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: [TESTERS needed] New POSIX permission handling Message-ID: <20150517014040.GA2688@dimstar.local.net> Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com References: <20150410100703.GA4401@calimero.vinschen.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.22 (2013-10-16) X-Optus-CM-Score: 0 X-Optus-CM-Analysis: v=2.1 cv=A5NVYcmG c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=+cDhJlqnNvz9E7c5l3ERGg==:117 a=+cDhJlqnNvz9E7c5l3ERGg==:17 a=y26AOypDAAAA:8 a=PO7r1zJSAAAA:8 a=M1kyBYkWWGkA:10 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=iaFubHWvAAAA:8 a=h1PgugrvaO0A:10 a=w_pzkKWiAAAA:8 a=lMTmLzKASAWmEnrWnvkA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=NydorYDDRSkA:10 X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-05/txt/msg00207.txt.bz2 On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 09:20:10PM -0500, Steven Penny wrote: > On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 7:00 PM, Steven Penny wrote: > > Here is the test I ran: > > The test I ran here > http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2015-04/msg00186.html > is now failing again: > > $ cd /cygdrive/c > > $ touch ~/{alpha,bravo}.sh ~+/{charlie,delta}.sh > > $ chmod +x ~/bravo.sh ~+/delta.sh > > $ ls -l --color ~/{alpha,bravo}.sh ~+/{charlie,delta}.sh > -rw-rwxr--+ 1 John None 0 May 15 19:12 /cygdrive/c/charlie.sh (green) > -rwxrwxr-x+ 1 John None 0 May 15 19:12 /cygdrive/c/delta.sh (green) > -rw-r--r-- 1 John None 0 May 15 19:12 /home/John/alpha.sh > -rwxr-xr-x 1 John None 0 May 15 19:12 /home/John/bravo.sh (green) > > Please sort this out. Having ???ls --color??? is pointless if everything is the same > color. > Your results look fine to me. In your original test, charlie.sh was -rw-rw-r--+, but now it is -rw-rwxr--+ (i.e. it has acquired group execute access). So why would you not expect it to show in green? Cheers ... Duncan. -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple