Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@sourceware.cygnus.com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner@sources.redhat.com
From: Chris Faylor <cgf@cygnus.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 22:27:54 -0400
To: cygwin@sources.redhat.com
Cc: winbox@onebox.com
Subject: Re: chmod does not work as expected
Message-ID: <20000902222754.D13854@cygnus.com>
Reply-To: cygwin@sources.redhat.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@sources.redhat.com, winbox@onebox.com
References: <20000902230156.CHCZ24872.mta01.onebox.com@onebox.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.6i
In-Reply-To: <20000902230156.CHCZ24872.mta01.onebox.com@onebox.com>; from winbox@onebox.com on Sat, Sep 02, 2000 at 04:01:56PM -0700

On Sat, Sep 02, 2000 at 04:01:56PM -0700, Winbox X wrote:
>I wonder if someone noticed this. After I chmod of a file
>a 'ls -l' tell me nothing is changed for the mod of the Group and Others.

Windows NT and 95, by default, have very different permission layouts
from UNIX.  SO, only the 'r' option of chmod (chmod +r foo) really has
any meaning.

On Windows NT, however, if the CYGWIN environment variable contains
'ntsec' then you can get UNIX-like permissions on NTFS drives.  Using
the somewhat deprecated 'ntea' allows you to get UNIX-like permissions
on NTFS and FAT drives but a huge (very hard to delete) file is created
on FAT drives when you do this.

On Windows 95, there are no alternatives.  You have to be content with
twiddling 'chmod -r'.

So, if you can use CYGWIN=ntsec then that's the best solution.  It turns
on all sorts of UNIX-like security in Cygwin.

Otherwise, you're right, 'chmod' doesn't do much.

Christopher Faylor
Cygwin Engineering Manager
Red Hat, Inc.

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