Missing commands/incorrect behaviour after update

[Eriksson, Michael]

Randall
<snip>
> >Well, 0666 does not seem like a good idea, since it gives 
> everyone the
> >right to change the files. Of course the main use of umask 
> is to restrict
> >access from group and other.
> 
> It's a very good idea and has been "the right way" (or, to use a 
> now-archaic phrase, "The Unix Way (tm)") ever since version 7 
> Unix when 
> umask was introduced. The whole point of writing the code to 
> give new files 
> full access (0666 or 0777) is so that the user is in complete 
> control by 
> virtue of the "umask."
> 
> You do understand that the umask value is "subtracted" 
> (bit-wise) from the 
> file mode specified by the program creating the new file 
> system entity, right?

No, I was actually under the impression that is was substracted
from 777. Thank you for setting me straight.
(That comes working with windows...)

<snip>

Michael

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/