https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12806
--- Comment #4 from Heinz-Willi Wyes <h...@delember-wyes.de> ---
I got a personal message from Lars Ellenberg that went also to
samba-b...@samba.org and rsync...@samba.org. He wrote:
------------------
Calling chmod only on (optimization: non-empty) directories would fix this.
I don't need to chmod a *file* before unlinking it, I just need write
permission on the directory it is located in.
(Now you have to convince the "appliance" to use a patched rsync ...)
Cheers,
Lars Ellenberg
diff --git a/delete.c b/delete.c
index 88e4230..223b6d2 100644
--- a/delete.c
+++ b/delete.c
@@ -97,10 +97,10 @@ static enum delret delete_dir_contents(char *fname, uint16
flags)
}
strlcpy(p, fp->basename, remainder);
- if (!(fp->mode & S_IWUSR) && !am_root && fp->flags & FLAG_OWNED_BY_US)
- do_chmod(fname, fp->mode | S_IWUSR);
/* Save stack by recursing to ourself directly. */
if (S_ISDIR(fp->mode)) {
+ if (!(fp->mode & S_IWUSR) && !am_root && fp->flags &
FLAG_OWNED_BY_US)
+ do_chmod(fname, fp->mode | S_IWUSR);
if (delete_dir_contents(fname, flags | DEL_RECURSE) != DR_SUCCESS)
ret = DR_NOT_EMPTY;
}
@@ -138,14 +138,13 @@ enum delret delete_item(char *fbuf, uint16 mode, uint16
flags)
fbuf, (int)mode, (int)flags);
}
- if (flags & DEL_NO_UID_WRITE)
- do_chmod(fbuf, mode | S_IWUSR);
-
if (S_ISDIR(mode) && !(flags & DEL_DIR_IS_EMPTY)) {
/* This only happens on the first call to delete_item() since
* delete_dir_contents() always calls us w/DEL_DIR_IS_EMPTY. */
ignore_perishable = 1;
/* If DEL_RECURSE is not set, this just reports emptiness. */
+ if (!(mode & S_IWUSR) && !am_root && flags & DEL_NO_UID_WRITE && flags
& DEL_RECURSE)
+ do_chmod(fbuf, mode | S_IWUSR);
ret = delete_dir_contents(fbuf, flags);
ignore_perishable = 0;
if (ret == DR_NOT_EMPTY || ret == DR_AT_LIMIT)
-----------------------------
As far as I understand, there actually *is* a design flaw in the rsync
implementation that causes the behavior I described in my original post.
I suggested the patch to my provider. They replied that they rather wait for a
new release of rsync with that patch officially applied.
Now I wonder what the status is. Will there be a patched version of rsync?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
--
Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing list.
To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync
Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
