GNU bug report logs - #17664
Solaris acl woes

Previous Next

Full log

Message #13 received at 17664-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ben Walton <bdwalton <at> gmail.com>
To: Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>
Cc: 17664-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org, 17669 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#17669: Fwd: Re: Solaris acl woes
Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2014 07:51:20 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Jun 2, 2014 6:46 PM, "Paul Eggert" <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu> wrote:
>
> [Forwarding this to Bug#17669 as bug-coreutils seems to have misfiled it
under 17664; closing 17664.]
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject:        Re: Solaris acl woes
> Date:   Mon, 02 Jun 2014 06:56:03 -0700
> From:   Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>
> Organization:   UCLA Computer Science Department
> To:     Ben Walton <bdwalton <at> gmail.com>, bug-gnulib <at> gnu.org,
bug-coreutils <at> gnu.org
>
>
>
> Ben Walton wrote:
>
>> The lib/file-has-acl.c:acl_ace_nontrivial code that returns 1 is:
>
>
> Why is it returning 1, exactly?  What are the value of access_masks[0,
> 1] and how do they compare to the masks, and what bits are set that
> shouldn't be if we want the ACLs to be trivial?

I didn't get back to this yesterday but will tonight.

What do you think about the fact that the Solaris tools seem to exhibit the
same behavior?

Thanks
-Ben

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.