This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: Adding MSYS functionality to Cygwin
- From: Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin at cygwin dot com>
- To: cygwin at cygwin dot com
- Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 15:12:44 +0200
- Subject: Re: Adding MSYS functionality to Cygwin
- References: <CABEPuQJDLjtbcLig1isTUJgb6RBCD8LNShbm9mTPcb9WM5S5fw at mail dot gmail dot com> <51C0B08E dot 8080900 at etr-usa dot com> <CABEPuQJJpRfPKSwZ7M0eTOdp1HxDcmvuy1=qXFHBw-8kLkZ1ZQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <51C0D956 dot 4090905 at etr-usa dot com> <20130619020234 dot GA3669 at ednor dot casa dot cgf dot cx> <51C1EAA3 dot 6040307 at etr-usa dot com> <20130619174514 dot GA6071 at ednor dot casa dot cgf dot cx> <51C213B4 dot 1030503 at cwilson dot fastmail dot fm> <CA+sc5m=nQsPxsk=vvuXe3fSenGvGiV8Sy=gcNRRCAngJ0LBaZA at mail dot gmail dot com>
- Reply-to: cygwin at cygwin dot com
On Jun 20 09:07, Earnie Boyd wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 4:25 PM, Charles Wilson wrote:
> > I assume that, eventually and as-needed, a *small* number of additional
> > "hooks" could be added to other code paths than exec/spawn/etc -- such as
> > the aforementioned uname(3) thing. (One of the "deltas" between cygwin and
> > msys was msys used a really stupid ownership/permission model -- pretend
> > current user owns everything; check the DOS R/O bit for +w; check the file
> > extension for +x; -- but this can be approximated with existing $CYGWIN
> > entries or mount options. I think. So reimplementing that "feature" of MSYS
> > would not require any additional hooks).
> IIRC that "stupid ownership/permission model" was a part of the
> original Cygwin 1.3 and was not modified.
CYGWIN=ntsec ruled way back when...
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple