Re: [BUG 1.7] Read-only files are not.

2009-01-07 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Dec 31 22:38, Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Thu, Jan 01, 2009 at 12:06:40AM +, Eric Blake wrote: > >David Rothenberger acm.org> writes: > >>It seems that read-only files in Cygwin 1.7 are not truly read-only. > >>The sequence of steps below shows that "chmod 444 file1" does not make > >>th

Re: [BUG 1.7] Read-only files are not.

2008-12-31 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Thu, Jan 01, 2009 at 12:06:40AM +, Eric Blake wrote: >David Rothenberger acm.org> writes: >>It seems that read-only files in Cygwin 1.7 are not truly read-only. >>The sequence of steps below shows that "chmod 444 file1" does not make >>the file read-only in Cygwin 1.7, while it does in Cygw

Re: [BUG 1.7] Read-only files are not.

2008-12-31 Thread David Rothenberger
On 12/31/2008 3:58 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote: On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 03:31:43PM -0800, David Rothenberger wrote: It seems that read-only files in Cygwin 1.7 are not truly read-only. The sequence of steps below shows that "chmod 444 file1" does not make the file read-only in Cygwin 1.7, while

Re: [BUG 1.7] Read-only files are not.

2008-12-31 Thread David Rothenberger
On 12/31/2008 4:06 PM, Eric Blake wrote: David Rothenberger acm.org> writes: It seems that read-only files in Cygwin 1.7 are not truly read-only. Are you perchance running as an Administrator, and therefore you have backup privileges? Yes. If so, then you have root-like power, and cygwin

Re: [BUG 1.7] Read-only files are not.

2008-12-31 Thread Eric Blake
David Rothenberger acm.org> writes: > > It seems that read-only files in Cygwin 1.7 are not truly > read-only. The sequence of steps below shows that "chmod 444 file1" > does not make the file read-only in Cygwin 1.7, while it does in > Cygwin 1.5. It may have something to do with the Read Only

Re: [BUG 1.7] Read-only files are not.

2008-12-31 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 03:31:43PM -0800, David Rothenberger wrote: >It seems that read-only files in Cygwin 1.7 are not truly >read-only. The sequence of steps below shows that "chmod 444 file1" >does not make the file read-only in Cygwin 1.7, while it does in >Cygwin 1.5. It may have something to

[BUG 1.7] Read-only files are not.

2008-12-31 Thread David Rothenberger
It seems that read-only files in Cygwin 1.7 are not truly read-only. The sequence of steps below shows that "chmod 444 file1" does not make the file read-only in Cygwin 1.7, while it does in Cygwin 1.5. It may have something to do with the Read Only DOS attribute. This is set by Cygwin 1.5 but not