Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@sourceware.cygnus.com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner@sourceware.cygnus.com
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 13:58:42 -0400
From: Chris Faylor <cygwin@sourceware.cygnus.com>
To: igoresha@iwmail.com
Cc: cygwin@sourceware.cygnus.com
Subject: Re: post b20.1: How to disable umask and access UNC path
Message-ID: <19990816135842.E1405@cygnus.com>
Reply-To: cygwin@sourceware.cygnus.com
Mail-Followup-To: igoresha@iwmail.com, cygwin@sourceware.cygnus.com
References: <99081613512402.09930@webb1.iname.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
In-Reply-To: <99081613512402.09930@webb1.iname.net>; from igoresha@iwmail.com on Mon, Aug 16, 1999 at 01:51:24PM -0400

On Mon, Aug 16, 1999 at 01:51:24PM -0400, igoresha@iwmail.com wrote:
> ---- Chris Faylor wrote: 
>> If I'm understanding what you're saying correctly, then you've just
>> outlined the solution to the problem -- use "net use" to allocate the
>> remote share to a logical drive.  Doesn't cygwin work correctly in
>> that context?
>No: it changes security on remote shares using local account information.
>
>In any case as it seems to me the simplest solution is to have an
>additional option to limit ntsec only to local drives.  Otherwise one
>has to impose NFS semantic on something that is quite orthogonal to it.
>And to do it in a reasonable way is hard...

Ah.  In that case, Corinna had some insightful comments earlier in the
thread.  I won't repeat them.

-chris

--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe@sourceware.cygnus.com