A request/suggestion for the behavior of chmod -X

[Charles Jie]

Hi,

Situation:

    I often need to pull lots of files from Windows boxes or from SD
    cards in FAT filesystem filled with photos from digital camera.

    The copied files usually have the x-bit enabled, which I hate very
    much in Unix-like systems. With it, the colored 'ls' output is not
    correct for any highlight like .zip .jpg .mp3 etc..

Problem:

    "chmod -x -R *" is not useful because it clears the x-bit of
    direcotries and forgets all files in sub-directories.

    I checked the man page and hope "chmod -X -R" may help but
    disappointed. "chomd -X does the same thing as "chomd -x".

Request:

    I believe "chmod -X" should do something different from "chomd -x"
    so that the -R can be rescued from its misfortune for the special
    combination with -x.

    Before it's changed, I can only rely on the following command to do
    the thing we expect upon "chmod -X -R":

        find -type f -executable -exec chmod -x {} \;

    which is so verbose and ungraceful for such a daily practice.

    I hope "chmod -X -R" may do that, which is decent way of the
    Unix-like.

Ref:

    1. I saw some complaints for "chmod -X -R" in the following. They
       think the behavior of +X and -X should be *symmetrical*.

       
http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/96509133/m/348006021931/inc/-1

    2. I'm sorry I can not check the archive of this mailing list before
       I post. The search of www.mail-archive.com is case-insensitive
       and gets hundreds of matches for "chmod -X"(including those for
       chmod -x), which I can not afford to go through.

--
===================================================================
Charles Jie (紀春興)                   Keya Technologies (開雅科技)
☎ +886 2 2938 2262   (Mobile) +886 920 397 746   Skype: charles.jie
===================================================================