X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-Original-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
DMARC-Filter:	OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org EE8C53856269
Authentication-Results:	sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none)
	header.from=huarp.harvard.edu
Authentication-Results:	sourceware.org;
	spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huarp.harvard.edu
Message-ID:	<7964c08d-83cb-aab3-5d1c-4a5f0a86bf0a@huarp.harvard.edu>
Date:	Wed, 29 Jun 2022 12:51:39 -0500
MIME-Version:	1.0
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
	Thunderbird/91.10.0
Subject:	Re: chmod g+s ineffective
From:	Norton Allen <allen AT huarp DOT harvard DOT edu>
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<9c053381-4466-ea8a-11d6-ea2e676d3b35 AT huarp DOT harvard DOT edu>
	<792558531 DOT 20220629153952 AT yandex DOT ru>
	<dd5e2750-5d86-0283-84fb-ef10efd4a8a0 AT huarp DOT harvard DOT edu>
In-Reply-To:	<dd5e2750-5d86-0283-84fb-ef10efd4a8a0@huarp.harvard.edu>
X-Spam-Status:	No, score=-0.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, BODY_8BITS,
	HTML_MESSAGE, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP,
	T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
X-Spam-Checker-Version:	SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on
	server2.sourceware.org
X-Content-Filtered-By:	Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29
X-BeenThere:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
X-Mailman-Version:	2.1.29
List-Id:	General Cygwin discussions and problem reports <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Archive:	<https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe:	<https://cygwin.com/mailman/listinfo/cygwin>,
	<mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=subscribe>
Sender:	"Cygwin" <cygwin-bounces+archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
X-MIME-Autoconverted:	from base64 to 8bit by delorie.com id 25THqRR3029086

On 6/29/2022 9:18 AM, Norton Allen wrote:
> On 6/29/2022 7:39 AM, Andrey Repin wrote:
>> Greetings, Norton Allen!
>>
>>> On one machine I have, chmod g+s fails to set the sticky bit. The 
>>> command
>>> does not return any error, but ls -l continues to show the bit not set.
>>>      $ mkdir foo
>>>      $ chgrp flight foo
>>>      $ chmod g+ws foo
>>>      $ ls -ld foo
>>>      drwxrwxr-x+ 1 nort flight 0 Jun 29 06:50 foo
>> ----------------^
>>
>> $ getfacl foo
>
> I will collect this shortly, but IIRC, getfacl showed it was not set. 
> I did see it set there under 'flags' on the system that works.

    nort AT EAS-SOFTWAREE1B ~
    $ ls -ld foo
    drwxrwxr-x 1 nort flight 0 Jun 29 06:25 foo

    nort AT EAS-SOFTWAREE1B ~
    $ chmod g+s foo

    nort AT EAS-SOFTWAREE1B ~
    $ ls -ld foo
    drwxrwxr-x 1 nort flight 0 Jun 29 06:25 foo

    nort AT EAS-SOFTWAREE1B ~
    $ getfacl foo
    # file: foo
    # owner: nort
    # group: flight
    user::rwx
    group::rwx
    other::r-x


>
>
>>
>>> I ran strace, and it looks like the correct system call parameter is 
>>> getting passed.
>>> I am curious as to how the sticky bit is implemented.
>> First see if it was set or not.
>>
>>> It isn't obvious what underlying Windows functionality (if any) is 
>>> applied.
>> It does. But the big question is, where do you try to do that.
>> If this is inside Cygwin installation root, then things could work 
>> more or
>> less POSIX'y. If this is outside Cygwin root (f.e. in your system 
>> profile), it
>> may or may not work completely, depends how did you mount /cygdrive 
>> prefix.
>
> I will confirm (shortly), but I'm pretty sure these tests were done 
> under vanilla /home (so c:\cygwin64\home)


Confirmed (as shown above). Tested in /home/nort on directory /home/nort/foo


>
>
>>
>>> Ah, just checked on a system where this works, and creating a file 
>>> in the
>>> directory from the
>>> command shell does not set the group, so presumably this 
>>> functionality is
>>> all within cygwin. That works for my application, except when it 
>>> doesn't.
>>> Any suggestions on what I should look for?
>> Look if you could avoid using +s. Isn't DACL enough?
>
> Am I correct that DACL is not available unless I am on a domain? This 
> is for a field computer, so connection to a domain is generally more 
> problematic than helpful.
>

So is this implemented using DACL under the hood? And is that expected 
to fail without a domain?


-- 
Problem reports:      https://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                  https://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:        https://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:     https://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -