Bob Proulx <b...@proulx.com> writes: > The particular part I was pedantically talking about was your comment > that said "checks that it is executable", yes, all good, and then you > go on to say "*and* sees to it that this user has permission". It was > that last part, the second part of the _and_ that I was pedantically > commenting upon. Because while true for non-root for root if it is > root there isn't any user test. For the root user it is purely a
Alright... at last. I've been laying for a chance to pedantic right back at you... > check to see if there is at least one 'x' bit set. The user part does > not matter. So the description really stops at the "checks that it is > executable" part. Full stop there. OMG! Did he really say: "The user part does not matter." Except when it does ... like when some thoughtful or even sinister user decides to monkey around with cron. So, it has to be said if pedantry is to live and grow... The user part is very important. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87hac6abdg....@newsguy.com
