Re: cp preserves mode with --no-preserve=mode

[Jim Meyering]

Pádraig Brady wrote:
> On 08/06/2012 12:29 PM, Ondrej Oprala wrote:
>> Hi, I'd like to propose a fix for a bug mentioned in the redhat bugzilla:
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755508
>> The patch adds another boolean instead of a proposed tristate, thus not
>> upsetting any existing code.
>> Also, if the behaviour proposed in the bugzilla entry when
>> --no-preserve=mode option
>> is specified is correct, I think the last test in cp/link-preserve
>> should be changed.
>> Shouldn't the --no-preserve=mode always create permissions of 0666 &
>> ~umask? The test
>> seems to assume that a 0777 & ~umask mode should be set.
>
> I agree with the behavior and approach of the patch.
> The NEWS item might be best in the "change in behavior" section?

Actually, I consider it a long-standing bug that
--no-preserve=mode would fail to do what its name implies.

> Also this line should use logical rather than bitwise operators.
>
>   x->explicit_no_preserve = ~on_off;

Good point.