No, these two changes are (from the functional point of view) independent - i.e. acl handling will work regardless of the order these 2 are applied. The only difference is, that once both are applied, we could link coreutils w/o libacl
Zasláno z Outlooku pro Android<https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg> ________________________________ From: Paul Eggert <egg...@cs.ucla.edu> Sent: Sunday, January 8, 2023 12:53:37 AM To: Ondrej Valousek <ondrej.valousek...@renesas.com>; 60...@debbugs.gnu.org <60...@debbugs.gnu.org> Subject: Re: bug#60620: [PATCH] copy.c: replace set_acl() with chmod_or_fchmod() On 2023-01-06 07:23, Ondrej Valousek wrote: > - && qset_acl (dst_name, dest_desc, restrictive_temp_mode) != 0) > + && chmod_or_fchmod (dst_name, dest_desc, restrictive_temp_mode) != > 0) Doesn't this sort of change require the qcopy-acl.c change in Gnulib? If so, we need to wait for that Gnulib change before installing this change, right? Otherwise we won't be copying ACLs correctly.
