setfacl(2.4.0.15): for next year !!!!! continued (2)

[Houder]

On 2015-12-22 12:37, Houder wrote:
> On 2015-12-21 18:25, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> On Dec 21 17:30, Houder wrote:
>>> Hi Corinna,
>>> 
>>> For next year !!!!! (posted as a reminder) ... See below.
>> 
>> Next year?  Nope... see below.
>> 
> 
> Hi Corinna,
> 
> Thank you for all the hard work you do ...
> 
> As an encore (for this year though ;-). See below (Cygwin-2.4.0-0.16). 
> <==== 16
[snip]

> 64-%% setfacl -m m:rwx bar.txt
> 64-%% getfacl bar.txt
> # file: bar.txt
> # owner: Henri
> # group: None
> user::rw-
> group::r--
> mask:rwx <==== yes, as requested by me, but ...
> other:r--
> 
> 64-%% ls -l bar.txt
> -rw-rwxr-- 1 Henri None 0 Dec 22 12:21 bar.txt
> 
>  - does this output make sense?
>    (no access to Linux at the moment; cannot verify)

To make it clear what I meant by 'but reading setfacl(1)' (previous 
post):

 From setfacl(1):

OPTIONS

  -n ...

(description)
The default behavior of setfacl is to recalculate the ACL mask entry, 
unless
a mask entry was explicitly given.

(my interpretation)
  - unless a mask entry with "less privileges" was specified (i.e. given) 
...
    (i.e. the mask must still be (internally) recalculated , using the 
rules as
     stated further down)

What I mean to say, is:
  - the mask entry should be the calculated mask, unless the specified 
(i.e. given)
    mask takes away one or more of the privileges of the calculated mask.
    if so, the mask entry should be the calculated mask, save for the 
privileges
    that have been taken away ...

(description continued)
The mask entry is set to the union of all permissions of the owning 
group, and
all named user and group entries.
(These are exactly the entries affected by the mask entry).

Regards,
Henri

=====

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple