GNU bug report logs - #17669
solaris: tests: cp,mv acl tests fail

Previous Next

Full log

Message #26 received at 17669 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Pádraig Brady <P <at> draigBrady.com>
To: Ben Walton <bdwalton <at> gmail.com>
Cc: Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>, 17669 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#17669: Fwd: Re: Solaris acl woes
Date: Tue, 03 Jun 2014 19:27:04 +0100

On 06/03/2014 07:07 PM, Ben Walton wrote:
> 
> On Jun 3, 2014 11:22 AM, "Pádraig Brady" <P <at> draigbrady.com <mailto:P <at> draigbrady.com>> wrote:
>>
>> On 06/03/2014 07:51 AM, Ben Walton wrote:
>> > On Jun 2, 2014 6:46 PM, "Paul Eggert" <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu <mailto: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 <mailto:eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>>
>> >> Organization:   UCLA Computer Science Department
>> >> To:     Ben Walton <bdwalton <at> gmail.com <mailto:bdwalton <at> gmail.com>>, bug-gnulib <at> gnu.org <mailto:bug-gnulib <at> gnu.org>,
>> > bug-coreutils <at> gnu.org <mailto: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?
>>
>> I'd probably adjust the tests to first:
>>
>> getfacl test.acl | setfacl -f - test.acl || skip_ "system is unable to copy ACLs"
>>
> 
> Not a bad idea, but those tools have different names on different systems and possibly different calling conventions.
> 
> If this is a preferred approach, at the very least, a presence check for the binary needs to wrap the precondition.

We already have that in require_acl_
Though yes it's very awkward that there is no standard here.
This is how one copies ACLs on the systems I've just checked:

solaris: getfacl file1 | setfacl -f - file2
linux:   getfacl file1 | setfacl --set-file=- file2
freebsd: getfacl file1 | setfacl -b -n -M - file2

So not ideal at all.

Which 6 tests did this affect BTW?

thanks,
Pádraig

Previous Next

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