> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> 022 ?
>>
>> http://www.bu.edu/cc/support/aboutunix/commands/umask/
>>
> No, you wouldn't use the umask in this case. I think the
> previously
> made suggestion of 755 is more than sufficient, and 744
> might be even
> better. That means that the owner will have full
> read/write/execute
> permissions while the group and others will have read-only
> permissions, which is perfectly fine for the purposes of
> allowing
> downloads.
Thanks Dave... I'm not even sure what a "umask" is. heh :) It'd been a
while since I'd done anything with it, and you know, googling for
chmod doesn't produce very intuitive results. :)
s. isaac dealey 954.927.5117
new epoch : isn't it time for a change?
add features without fixtures with
the onTap open source framework
http://www.sys-con.com/story/?storyid=44477&DE=1
http://www.sys-con.com/story/?storyid=45569&DE=1
http://www.fusiontap.com
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
