From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11798 invoked by alias); 13 Sep 2012 00:03:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 11786 invoked by uid 22791); 13 Sep 2012 00:03:42 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=3.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,BOTNET,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_NO,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from vms173013pub.verizon.net (HELO vms173013pub.verizon.net) (206.46.173.13) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 00:03:30 +0000 Received: from [192.168.1.231] ([unknown] [96.237.111.191]) by vms173013.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 32bit (built Apr 16 2009)) with ESMTPA id <0MA9009T9HHNSM00@vms173013.mailsrvcs.net> for cygwin@cygwin.com; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 19:03:29 -0500 (CDT) Message-id: <505122CC.3060306@cygwin.com> Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 00:41:00 -0000 From: "Larry Hall (Cygwin)" Reply-to: cygwin@cygwin.com User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120907 Thunderbird/15.0.1 MIME-version: 1.0 To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: ls shows different permissions for the same file References: In-reply-to: Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit 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 X-SW-Source: 2012-09/txt/msg00160.txt.bz2 On 9/12/2012 2:57 PM, Boemker, Tim wrote: > Larry, > > Do you mean that, with a POSIX path, I get ACL-based permissions, but > with Windows paths, I get just user-group-other permissions? Not quite. The POSIX path will give you the correct mapping of Windows ACLs into ugo plus any additional ACLS that don't map will show up with the '+' indicator. With Windows paths, you get simple, hard-coded, ugo, without any indication of further ACLs, if they exist. > That sounds reasonable, but shouldn't they agree as far as they overlap? > In the following example, for example, shouldn't they agree whether foo is > writable by Domain Users? No because with Windows paths Cygwin doesn't look at Windows ACLs. It just reports a default set of ugo permissions. -- Larry _____________________________________________________________________ A: Yes. > Q: Are you sure? >> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. >>> Q: Why is top posting annoying in email? -- 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