On Sat, 4 Jun 2011, Gerrit Code Review wrote:
The following commit has been merged in the master branch:
commit 7d76a5b4f9eb4c0ed9e09bbc3c54a4f1f8da1bdc
Author: Rainer Strunz <[email protected]>
Date: Mon Apr 18 00:09:33 2011 +0100
fs: add support for relative ACL changes
This change permits "fs setacl" to change ACLs in a relative
manner, rather than just setting rights absolutely as it is
done now.
If a single plus (+) or minus (-) character is appended to
the rights' letters argument, the new rights are computed
relatively to the existing ones.
I really do not care much and do not want to start a bikeshed, but I was
wondering if there was any reason to put the + to the right of the
permission (as opposed to the left as chmod(1) does), or if it was just an
arbitrary choice.
Thanks,
Ben Kaduk
A few examples should make clear that behaviour:
old rights: rights set: new rights:
-----------------------------------------------
rl a+ rla
rlid idwa- rl
rla write- a
rl write- [none] (ie. entry deleted)
[any] read= rl
As shown in the last example, a '=' character got implemented
also (and for free) as an alternative writing of the current
and default behaviour of just setting an ACL.
FIXES 123962
Change-Id: If15a4ab3c69ec44a42c8746a0b93f5e8b785d61e
Reviewed-on: http://gerrit.openafs.org/4496
Tested-by: BuildBot <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Derrick Brashear <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Jeffrey Altman <[email protected]>
doc/man-pages/pod1/fs_setacl.pod | 20 +++++++++++++-
src/WINNT/afsd/fs.c | 48 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
src/venus/fs.c | 53 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
3 files changed, 102 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
--
OpenAFS Master Repository
_______________________________________________
OpenAFS-cvs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-cvs
_______________________________________________
OpenAFS-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel
