This is the mail archive of the cygwin mailing list for the Cygwin project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Re: noacl functionality for MS-DOS destination paths?


On Dec 18 20:53, Lawrence Mayer wrote:
Is there any way to get noacl functionality when using MS-DOS destination
paths?

My etc/fstab file (below) applies noacl for UNIX destination paths e.g.

C:\cygwin\bin\mkdir.exe /c/foo

creates directory C:\foo with NTFS default permissions inherited from
parent directory C:\ (the same as DOS mkdir C:\foo would do).

But an MS-DOS destination path, e.g.

C:\cygwin\bin\mkdir.exe C:\foo

causes Cygwin to ignore noacl in etc/fstab and create C:\foo with
POSIX-like permissions (non-NTFS default and not inherited from parent
directory C:\).

According to http://cygwin.com/1.7/cygwin-ug-net.html#mount-table

"Otherwise, the handling of MS-DOS filenames bypasses the mount table"

But if Cygwin 1.7 bypasses etc/fstab for MS-DOS filenames and no longer
supports the nontsec option, I'm stuck.

When using MS-DOS destination paths in Cygwin 1.7, is there any way to get
noacl functionality - i.e. where Cygwin creates objects with NTFS default
permissions inherited from their parent directory rather than POSIX-like
permissions?

If not, are there any plans to add such functionality to Cygwin 1.7?


On 11:59, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
Not yet.  I'm reluctant to add a setting just for DOS paths.  What we
could do is to handle incoming DOS paths always in dumb Windows mode
(noacl,posix=0).  Given that they are not POSIX paths anyway, there's
probably not a lot of sense in treating them POSIXy.


Corinna


Thanks so much for replying Corinna. I completely agree that always handling DOS paths with noacl,posix=0 makes sense and is a substantial improvement.

I'm amazed how quickly you implemented this change into v1.7.0-36! Thanks so much!

Would you like any help updating the Cygwin User's Guide to reflect this change? If so:

(1) Should I submit a diff -u against
http://cygwin.com/1.7/cygwin-ug-net.html?

(2) Should I send the diff to cygwin-patches@cygwin.com?

Holiday Greetings,
Lawrence

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]