Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2014 12:27:41 -0800 From: Charles Swiger <cswiger@mac.com> To: Andrea Venturoli <ml@netfence.it> Cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Ports changing permissions on directories Message-ID: <D9A998C4-BACD-41AA-A319-972C32DC8C3F@mac.com> In-Reply-To: <548607EF.5080504@netfence.it> References: <5485FE17.9050909@netfence.it> <D5D0E5D3-84C5-4D0E-BF0F-B481B33F1C8F@mac.com> <548607EF.5080504@netfence.it>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Dec 8, 2014, at 12:19 PM, Andrea Venturoli <ml@netfence.it> wrote: > On 12/08/14 21:04, Charles Swiger wrote: >>> Since I always need to "chmod 775 /var/db/clamav" after an upgrade, = I'm asking: >>> _ where does this come from? I tried to look into Makefile, but = didn't get to it; >>=20 >> Is the umask setup in your shell 022 or 002? >=20 > If I run "umask" as root, I get 22, if that's what you mean. Yes. (Assuming you install ports as root, which is likely.) > However, I'm puzzled about how this should affect directories which = already exist. It wouldn't affect already existing directories. But installing a new = port or upgrading an existing port might likely recreate the files and directory trees = setup for that port and thus inherit the effects of the umask, except for anything which BSD = install is being invoked with an explicit -m argument. > Is there some official doc on the interaction between umask and the = port system? I didn't see anything in the Porter's Handbook. Regards, --=20 -Chuck
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?D9A998C4-BACD-41AA-A319-972C32DC8C3F>