I am only speaking for windows permissions:

>
>>
>> But if you push the directory with recurse => true, what permissions 
>> would files get in that case? Permissions of the file on the master, or 
>> default permission for that scope? 
>>
>  
On Windows the answer is the permissions on the endpoint (no 
modification).  Permissions are never copied from src to dest.
Particularly sourcing from *nix, I would end up with a box of chocolateys I 
don't want to eat.  
 
 

>
>
> I think you're confusing two unrelated dimensions.  Whether the resource 
> is recursive or not, if no mode (uid/gid) is declared for it then Puppet 
> should not modify the mode (uid/gid) of *existing files* as part of 
> managing that resource.  This is standard Puppet behavior, and users should 
> be able to rely on it.  There are functional reasons to want it, too.
>
 
No - don't want it. no mode, no perm change.  Standard windows inheritance 
model.
 

>
> There is a completely separate question of what Puppet should do when it 
> *creates 
> a new file*: if the resource declaration does not specify a mode 
> (uid/gid) then Puppet either must choose one by some other means.  Its 
> current behavior is to use the properties of the source file, which I 
> actually think is fine, though issue 5240 raises questions about that 
> behavior.
>
> Negative - not fine for windows.  Never want the source mode to end up on 
the target.  Bad settings = takeown = bad.
 
 

> Recursive File resources have long been a problematic area for Puppet.  
> That's not a flaw in Puppet (unless you consider recursive Files themselves 
> to be a misfeature); rather, it's inherent in the problem.  The whole point 
> of recursive File resources is to manage a bunch of files without declaring 
> all the properties of each one individually.  But then, you're not 
> declaring the properties of each one individually.  If you want fine 
> control then you need something that carries all the needed data.  The best 
> alternative in most cases is either to manage Files separately or to 
> package them up and manage them via the Package.
>
> On windows inheritance model works nicely.  The security.rb and mode 
interpretation should not be applicable on windows.  We need to rewrite 
perms to respect ntfs. 
 

>
> John
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Puppet Users" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/puppet-users/-/jnCsosOdCsAJ.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.

Reply via email to