On Mon, 27 Jan 2003, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 02:30:35PM +0100, Ronald Landheer-Cieslak wrote: >> In any case, seeing the behaviour of the exec-permission bits, I have a >> "wouldn't it be nice if...": wouldn't it be nice if the executable >> permission bits would actually correspond to the executability >> of a file? I mean, an explorer-created empty file is definitely not >> executable - notably because it's empty. > With ntsec on, stat() and friends report the permission bits set in > the ACL. I wouldn't want to see anything else. The code using the > mount info is only used when ntsec is off. OK, thanx for the clarity :)
rlc -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
