On 11/19/2013 12:58 PM, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
Hi,
I have modified the test to print the user name as well:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dfuchs/webrev_8005202/webrev.01/
Looks good to me. As we discussed offline, Files.isWritable may return
true on a non-writable directory if running with root permission. The
check you added was fine.
thanks
Mandy
-- daniel
On 11/19/13 9:26 PM, Mandy Chung wrote:
On 11/19/2013 12:12 PM, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
On 11/19/13 9:04 PM, Mandy Chung wrote:
On 11/19/2013 11:35 AM, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
I am therefore proposing to add an additional check in the test's
setUp() method, in order to verify that the directory is indeed
not writable.
It may be useful to print the owner of the directory in case if it's
running with root permission.
OK - I assume I can find that by foraging into the nio Files API?
I think you could use
java.nio.file.attribute.FileOwnerAttributeView.getOwner() while you may
need to deal with "acl" vs "posix".
webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dfuchs/webrev_8005202/webrev.00/
175 final boolean nonWritable =
nonWritableDir.setWritable(false);
176 final boolean isWritable = Files.isWritable(path);
177 if (nonWritable && !isWritable) {
Perhaps it should assert isWriteable if File.setWriteable returns
true.
I'm not sure we want to fail in that case. I mean - the bug
is complaining that the test fails in the first place ;-)
I would be inclined to have the test simply skip the non-writable
test in both cases where it detects that it didn't manage to create
a non-writable dir.
If File.setWriteable returns true and isWriteable is false, it'd be a
bug that we want to know about. Perhaps you want to log if the
directory is writeable or not instead of adding it to the check.
Mandy
