Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 14 Dec 2006 02:51:01 +1100 (EST)
From:      Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
To:        Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: src/lib/libc/sys chmod.2
Message-ID:  <20061214023620.A1178@besplex.bde.org>
In-Reply-To: <200612131322.kBDDMwlN082116@repoman.freebsd.org>
References:  <200612131322.kBDDMwlN082116@repoman.freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 13 Dec 2006, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:

> pjd         2006-12-13 13:22:58 UTC
>
>  FreeBSD src repository
>
>  Modified files:
>    lib/libc/sys         chmod.2
>  Log:
>  Append-only flag also denies chmod(2). Is this correct behaviour?

I don't like it, but it follows from a literal interpretation of "only".
I think the append-only flag should only have applied to data, (including
clobbering of the data by removing the file), but in some cases you
may actually want the current semantics of the flag (immutable attributes
(except for mtime and atime via append and read) together with immutable
old-data), and there is currently no other way to specify this.

The main incorrect behaviour near here is no-unlink denying chflags(2).
This bug is is already documented (not as a bug).  The no-unlink flag
should at most deny chflags() of itself.

Bruce



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20061214023620.A1178>