And here I thought Posix file permissions were specific to Unix systems…

But if the patch only works on Windows I am wondering if it should be included. 

Ralph

> On Jun 20, 2017, at 4:27 PM, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> and of course, it passes on my Windows box... Must be OS-specific. Maybe we
> should mark this test with a JUnit Assume such that it only runs on Windows
> for now?
> 
> Gary
> 
> On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 4:22 PM, Ralph Goers (JIRA) <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> 
>>     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-1699?page=
>> com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
>> 
>> Ralph Goers reopened LOG4J2-1699:
>> ---------------------------------
>> 
>> The Jenkins build now has a unit test failing.
>> org.junit.ComparisonFailure: expected:<rw-r[w]-r--> but was:<rw-r[-]-r-->
>>        at org.apache.logging.log4j.core.appender.FilePermissionsTest.
>> testFilePermissions(FilePermissionsTest.java:126)
>> 
>>> Configurable Log File Permissions with PosixFilePermission
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>>> 
>>>                Key: LOG4J2-1699
>>>                URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-1699
>>>            Project: Log4j 2
>>>         Issue Type: Question
>>>         Components: Appenders
>>>        Environment: Linux
>>>           Reporter: Demetrios Dimatos
>>>           Priority: Critical
>>>             Labels: features
>>>            Fix For: 2.9
>>> 
>>>        Attachments: LOG4J2-1699.patch
>>> 
>>>  Original Estimate: 336h
>>> Remaining Estimate: 336h
>>> 
>>> We would like to hear the communities thoughts on being able to
>> configure the permissions log files are created with. We don't want to rely
>> on UMASK because we have managed services who's process should generate
>> logs with a 644 yet deployed applications by users should default to a 640
>> because the logs may contain sensitive information.
>>> We will make the modification and set this in the properties file. Now
>> we are looking to see what the community position would be on accepting
>> such a patch, we don't want to be patching our own distribution
>> indefinitely.
>>> I searched all the JIRAs and was not able to find any matching
>> requirements recently. All I could find was something dated in 2006:
>> https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40407
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
>> (v6.4.14#64029)
>> 


Reply via email to