cheers todd,
also messing me up was something i found on a bsd site that seems to apply to
linux as well but i don't recall seeing it mentioned before:
i read that permissions get processed in the order u,g,o and when the running
user matchs one of those - the processing stops! - which means that if a file
is:
-rw-r-x--- apache apache somefile
then even though user apache is a member of group apache, the group has the
'x' bit set, user apache does not have that particular permission, such a
simple little thing :-) obviously there is no reason why a user should have
less permssion than the group it's in but it doesn't follow neccessarily that
this would lead to not having the group permissions applied, i was staring at
the screen listing for ages and although i saw that situation existed it just
didn't occur to me that it was causing my problem!
bascule
(living and learning since 1967)
On Tuesday 24 September 2002 4:27 am, you wrote:
> bascule wrote on Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 01:21:07AM +0100 :
> > i think i'm coming unstuck about the difference between 'r' - read
> > permission and 'x' -enter perm for a directory, what exactly is the
> > difference?
>
> IIRC, when you set ONLY the x bit for a directory, a user can access
> files in that directory if they know the exact name, but they cannot do
> a directory listing. Try it:
> cd ~
> mkdir test1
> touch file{1,2,3}
> chmod 111 test1
> ls -l
> ls -l test1
>
--
"Yes, it's the right planet, all right, " he said again.
"Right planet, wrong universe. "
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft?
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
