Subject: bug#29069: info coreutils file permissions: improvements/bug-report

From: kalle <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2017 21:38:06 +0100

hello,
here some improvement proposals/bug report on info coreutils file
permissions:

-in my opinion it would be good to explain the general idea bihind the
file permissions a bit more. what the issues are etc. Elese one doesn't
really understand, what all the detailed fuss is about.
-why is running a file considered different  from reading one? Fact is,
that this point underlies the concept of symbolic mode with it's `rwx'.
-27.1,end of the first section: add the sentence "They have a different
meaning, according to wether they are directories or not"
-27.2.4, part "or already had execute permission": had execute
permission for which user category? for the one in question or for any?
-explain more fundamentally the relationship between file permission
rights and the rights of the corresponding directory , for example
regarding to deletion: who has the right to delete file /b/a? users with
writing permission on a AND those withrmission on b?
27.4: wouldn't it be better to talk about 'operators _in_ numeric mode'
rather than from an 'operator numeric mode', since "numeric mode" is an
atrribute?
-27.3: is there an info/man-document, where binary, octal, hex-numbers
are explained? If, it should be referred to. If not, shouldn't there be
one (and where would it fit in? ) ?-- I could write the text...Since
this documentation assumes the knowledge of it..
-27.5: it is said, that "a command like `chmod' does not affect the
set-user-id, unless […] sets them in a numeric mode".But also, the
example states that `chmod 0755' or `mkdir -m 0755' doesn't change
set-user/group-id- bits. For me, this doesn't fit together,since the `0'
in `0755' explicitly sets all special mode bits to zero.
-27.5,last section, it says: "this behavior is a GNU extension". Which
behavior is meant? And if it concerns the whole section 27.5, it should
be put right at the beginning.

greetings,
kalle