If you read again very carefully, you will see that I modified permissions AFTER I noticed they were messed up. Ok?
In my case, these additional permissions were allowing everyone to modify files. Not harmful at all, indeed. I do not remember all the details, I remember these permissions were everywhere. So I just replaced everything with proper permissions and disabled acl support in cygwin. The only problem was setup.exe but now I compiled it with a modification and this last problem gone. I understand that I do not have all the details required for a bug report. And it wasn't an attempt to report a bug. I was asked why I care about permissions, so I answered. Anyway, the problem is solved now, I also submitted an easy patch to setup.exe source for everyone who want to get rid of this problem as well. If I ever get into a problem with permissions again, I will try to make a proper bug report instead of just fixing permissions. On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 6:28 PM, Jeremy Bopp <jer...@bopp.net> wrote: > On 9/2/2010 12:49 AM, Vasya Pupkin wrote: >> No, it wasn't a mess of my own making. I did not ever touch >> permissions, and it was a clean install. I don't know where these >> permissions came from, but ls -l displayed something like that for >> most files: > > I read Andy's comment to mean that the mess of your own making is the > result of you changing the permissions, not the existing permissions as > left by setup.exe. You made the mess (or correction as you see it) and > are now fighting with setup.exe to maintain it. > >> drwxr-xr-x+ 1 user group 0 2010-09-02 09:32 tests >> >> This "+" sign after permissions string indicated non-cygwin >> permissions which was impossible to remove using cygwin's chmod. And >> since permissions are not inherited, it was not possible to mass >> remove them using windows either. So, I just removed all permissions >> and forced their inheritance. That solved all problems, until I >> updated installation using setup.exe. > > The "+" indicates that there are further permissions specified as ACLs > for which the getfacl and setfacl commands should be used to view and > manipulate, respectively. You would see the same behavior from ls on a > Linux system which had ACL support and extra ACLs applied to a similar > file or directory. There, too, chmod would not be able to modify those > ACLs. > > What your example does not indicate is that anything unintentional > happened with the application of permissions on that example directory. > Nor does it indicate that the given permissions are in any way harmful > to the maintenance of your system or the use of the files and > directories in question. > > Where was that directory located? Did you create it, or did setup.exe > create it? What problems do those permissions cause? > >> Believe me or not, but I really did not touch any permissions until I >> noticed that strange behaviour. And I am the only administrator. >> Machine is not a part of any domains. So, unless it's a kind of black >> magic, there was (and maybe still is) some issue with permissions in >> cygwin. That is why I don't want to use them. > > I'm sure the Cygwin developers would be more than willing to patch any > defect surrounding the incorrect application of permissions to files > which is the result of Cygwin itself or setup.exe. Unfortunately, you > have not demonstrated any such erroneous behavior yet. It seems more > likely that you have a small misunderstanding about how the permissions > you see work and how they are represented under Cygwin. Have you read > the section of the user guide which discusses permissions under Cygwin? > > Perhaps, you have found a genuine defect. If so, you need to provide > more data so that someone else can reproduce the problem. You could > start by installing another instance of Cygwin into a fresh directory > (this won't affect your primary installation) and then demonstrate the > specific files that have faulty permissions and explain how those > permissions will lead to further problems. > > With luck, someone will be able to explain why things are the way you > see them such that you are comfortable accepting how Cygwin does things. :-) > > -Jeremy > > -- > 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 > > -- 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
