Proposed change for Win9x file permissions...

Corinna Vinschen
Mon May 26 17:13:00 GMT 2003

On Mon, May 26, 2003 at 11:34:46AM -0400, Bill C Riemers wrote:
> I'm not saying there won't be problems if someone using this patch does something like:
>     umask 777
> I'm just saying it is a recoverable mistake.  The umask local to the current process at it's children only.  Executables should
> still execute, but scripts probably won't.  However, just changing the umask back to something more reasonable recovers the file
> permissions.  So even the person who edits the change into their .profile or /etc/profile will be able to restore the previous
> value.

Ok, we should just try it, I guess.  Chris?  Ok to check in?


Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Developer                      
Red Hat, Inc.

More information about the Cygwin-patches mailing list