Re: Bug#329358: [bug #14619] find -perm +... broken in 4.2.25

On Thursday 06 October 2005 17:49, Eric Blake wrote: > Follow-up Comment #4, bug #14619 (project findutils): > > I don't think the original poster has discovered any bugs, rather just > their misunderstanding of the (admittedly confusing) POSIX requirements. I just read the man-page, where it says:

[bug #14619] find -perm +... broken in 4.2.25

Follow-up Comment #5, bug #14619 (project findutils): $ touch 000 100 111 777 $ for f in * ; do touch $f $f ; done ^ Obviously, that should be a chmod. ___ Reply to this item at:

[bug #14619] find -perm +... broken in 4.2.25

Follow-up Comment #4, bug #14619 (project findutils): I don't think the original poster has discovered any bugs, rather just their misunderstanding of the (admittedly confusing) POSIX requirements. I have, however, found a bug in 4.2.25: $ touch 000 100 111 777 $ for f in * ; do touch $f $f ; d

[bug #14619] find -perm +... broken in 4.2.25

Follow-up Comment #3, bug #14619 (project findutils): The POSIX rules are that -perm mode only returns true on files that exactly match mode, if mode is a valid POSIX mode without a leading -; and the POSIX grammar for valid modes includes leading +. The old findutils behavior were often incompa