[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#17669: Fwd: Re: Solaris acl woes
From: |
Paul Eggert |
Subject: |
bug#17669: Fwd: Re: Solaris acl woes |
Date: |
Mon, 02 Jun 2014 10:44:57 -0700 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0 |
[Forwarding this to Bug#17669 as bug-coreutils seems to have misfiled it
under 17664; closing 17664.]
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Solaris acl woes
Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2014 06:56:03 -0700
From: Paul Eggert <address@hidden>
Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department
To: Ben Walton <address@hidden>, address@hidden,
address@hidden
Ben Walton wrote:
The lib/file-has-acl.c:acl_ace_nontrivial code that returns 1 is:
Why is it returning 1, exactly? What are the value of access_masks[0,
1] and how do they compare to the masks, and what bits are set that
shouldn't be if we want the ACLs to be trivial?
- bug#17669: Solaris acl woes, Ben Walton, 2014/06/02
- bug#17664: Solaris acl woes, Paul Eggert, 2014/06/02
- bug#17669: Fwd: Re: Solaris acl woes,
Paul Eggert <=
- bug#17669: Fwd: Re: Solaris acl woes, Ben Walton, 2014/06/03
- bug#17669: bug#17664: bug#17669: Fwd: Re: Solaris acl woes, Paul Eggert, 2014/06/03
- bug#17669: Fwd: Re: Solaris acl woes, Pádraig Brady, 2014/06/03
- bug#17669: Fwd: Re: Solaris acl woes, Paul Eggert, 2014/06/03
- bug#17669: Fwd: Re: Solaris acl woes, Ben Walton, 2014/06/03
- bug#17669: Fwd: Re: Solaris acl woes, Pádraig Brady, 2014/06/03
- bug#17669: Fwd: Re: Solaris acl woes, Ben Walton, 2014/06/03