www.delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
Mailing-List: | contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm |
List-Subscribe: | <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com> |
List-Archive: | <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/> |
List-Post: | <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com> |
List-Help: | <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs> |
Sender: | cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com |
Mail-Followup-To: | cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
Delivered-To: | mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
To: | cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
X-Injected-Via-Gmane: | http://gmane.org/ |
Path: | not-for-mail |
From: | Jehan <nahor AT bravobrava DOT com> |
Newsgroups: | gmane.os.cygwin |
Subject: | Re: Permission denied on a windows share |
Date: | Sun, 14 Jul 2002 10:44:58 -0700 |
Lines: | 31 |
Message-ID: | <agsd94$utq$1@main.gmane.org> |
References: | <5 DOT 1 DOT 0 DOT 14 DOT 2 DOT 20020713194509 DOT 02bb9210 AT pop3 DOT cris DOT com> <5 DOT 1 DOT 0 DOT 14 DOT 2 DOT 20020713204337 DOT 02acf938 AT pop3 DOT cris DOT com> <5 DOT 1 DOT 0 DOT 14 DOT 2 DOT 20020713220237 DOT 02acf568 AT pop3 DOT cris DOT com> |
NNTP-Posting-Host: | adsl-64-168-83-170.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net |
Mime-Version: | 1.0 |
X-Trace: | main.gmane.org 1026668644 31674 64.168.83.170 (14 Jul 2002 17:44:04 GMT) |
X-Complaints-To: | usenet AT main DOT gmane DOT org |
NNTP-Posting-Date: | Sun, 14 Jul 2002 17:44:04 +0000 (UTC) |
User-Agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.1a+) Gecko/20020708 |
X-Accept-Language: | en-us, en |
Randall R Schulz wrote: > The reason is the mapping between Cygwin's Unix / POSIX permissions and > Windows is not reversible. Windows permissions are far more refined, so > it is inevitable that in at least one case (in reality, many cases), > there are multiple distinct Windows permissions that map to a single > Cygwin / Unix / POSIX file "mode." And? I don't understand the point. All that tells me is that "ls -l" may not show the real permissions because Windows persmissions doesn't always map to Unix/POSIX. That's fine with me. That would be the explanation for an application failing when it checks explicitly for permissions. But I don't think "cat" and "cp" do any permissions checking, they fully rely on the underlying system for that. What I don't understand is why cygwin doesn't rely on Windows. For what I know of ntsec, it sets the permissions/ownership of files. It also read them so "ls -l" show correct permissions (as much as possible knowing that not all Windows permissions map to Unix). But once their are set, then Windows should be able to take care of denying/allowing access accordingly. Why would cygwin need to do more security checking than Windows does? Why would cygwin deny me write access to a file when I can do it with any other Windows application? > Cygwin will "leave it to Windows" if you turn of "ntsec" and / or "ntea." I know, it used to be that way. But then I don't see what file belong to who and what I am allowed to do. Jehan -- 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/
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |