On Tuesday 12 February 2002 19:04, you wrote: > * Thomas Bushnell, BSG writes: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alfred M. Szmidt) writes: > >> - Print the "unknown permission bits" (what is the official name > >> for this?). > > > > Well, I would say it's the "nobody" bits or maybe the "anonymous" > > user bits or the "no ID" bits. We should figure out one standard > > name to use. > > Right, I used "unknown" because that was what was in the header file, > bits/stat.h. "nobody" would be confusing as there is on most systems > a user by that name (or do we even care what weird things they do on > those UNIX systems? :). Maybe we could use "unknown user"? > > [snip] > > >> And I am working on setting the permission bits with chown, and > >> changing the author bit with chown (chown owner:group:author?), and > >> will probably implement the chauth (I think thats a better name > >> then chauthor) program. > > > > Why is chauth better than chauthor? > > Same reason why we have chown instead of chowner, I guess. But maybe > users would get confused with the auth translator, in that case chauthor > would be a better name.
I'm sure users will get confused... > > >> I was thinking on maybe removing all the "normal" UNIX file modes > >> and only have ones for active/passive translators, and showing > >> output similar to when you have a symlink (this will only work for > >> passive translators): You could also add the PID of an active translator, that would be a cool feature IMHO > > > > The normal modes really are important information; the filesystems > > are setting them because it's a useful hint to users about how the > > file behaves. > > Yes, but I thought that with the `symlink like' (the one suggested bellow) > info this could be used instead of the normal modes. > > >> trw-rw-rw-rw- 1 root root root 0, 0 Dec 27 22:25 /dev/null => > >> /hurd/null > >> > >> Note, I used => instead of the normal -> to show that it is really > >> different. > > > > Good idea. > > Should this also apply to symlinks? Or should the default behaviour be > used. I think the translator for symlinks shouldn't be shown or it should be an option. > > Oh, can we define S_IRUNK , S_IWUNK and S_IXUNK in a libc header? > > #define S_IRUNK (S_IRUSR << S_IUNKSHIFT) > #define S_IWUNK (S_IWUSR << S_IUNKSHIFT) > #define S_IXUNK (S_IXUSR << S_IUNKSHIFT) I think the right place for those bits is bits/stat.h _______________________________________________ Help-hurd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-hurd
