On Tuesday, January 31, 2023 10:56:54 PM CET Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 1/31/23 13:23, Ondrej Valousek wrote:
> > Yes, that's nice, thanks!
> > However I think it would be also fair to mention that ACLs will not be
> > converted/translated (I.e. no posix to nfsv4 or vice versa). We are not
> > that
On 1/31/23 13:23, Ondrej Valousek wrote:
Yes, that's nice, thanks!
However I think it would be also fair to mention that ACLs will not be
converted/translated (I.e. no posix to nfsv4 or vice versa). We are not that
clever.
OK, I installed that along with the attached further patch to talk
_
From: Paul Eggert
Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2023 7:46:28 PM
To: Ondrej Valousek ; Kamil Dudka
Cc: 61...@debbugs.gnu.org <61...@debbugs.gnu.org>; bug-coreutils@gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#61035: [PATCH] cp: improve help regarding ACLs
OK, how about the attached more-ambitious patch ins
OK, how about the attached more-ambitious patch instead? I hope it helps
clarify this confusing area.From 1f5703b46cd8001706c1192a2976c7fc4d86002a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Paul Eggert
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2023 10:39:43 -0800
Subject: [PATCH] cp: improve --preserve usage doc
* src/cp.c
> My understanding is that ACLs can be seen as extension over permission bits
> whereas the extended attributes can store pretty
> much anything. I am not saying which approach is (more) correct though.
Exactly my point as well.
Also, it is not correct to say "cp -p now preserves ACL" because
On Sunday, January 29, 2023 11:04:22 PM CET Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 2023-01-29 03:06, Kamil Dudka wrote:
> > On Wednesday, January 25, 2023 11:01:45 PM CET Paul Eggert wrote:
> >> On 2023-01-25 13:56, Ondrej Valousek wrote:
> >>> But it's not the same meaning. What I am trying to explain here is
On 2023-01-29 03:06, Kamil Dudka wrote:
On Wednesday, January 25, 2023 11:01:45 PM CET Paul Eggert wrote:
On 2023-01-25 13:56, Ondrej Valousek wrote:
But it's not the same meaning. What I am trying to explain here is that
Cp -p (or cp --preserve=mode) also retains ACLs. This fact is not
On Wednesday, January 25, 2023 11:01:45 PM CET Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 2023-01-25 13:56, Ondrej Valousek wrote:
> > But it's not the same meaning. What I am trying to explain here is that
> >
> > Cp -p (or cp --preserve=mode) also retains ACLs. This fact is not obvious,
> > but yet it's
On 2023-01-25 13:56, Ondrej Valousek wrote:
But it's not the same meaning. What I am trying to explain here is that
Cp -p (or cp --preserve=mode) also retains ACLs. This fact is not obvious, but
yet it's happening
Then I'm afraid I don't understand. In what sense do ACLs differ from
xattr
eda 25. ledna 2023 21:43
Komu: Ondrej Valousek ; 61...@debbugs.gnu.org
<61...@debbugs.gnu.org>
Předmět: Re: bug#61035: [PATCH] cp: improve help regarding ACLs
On 2023-01-25 01:24, Ondrej Valousek wrote:
>> For --preserve[=ATTR_LIST] the usage message says "preserve the specified
On 2023-01-25 01:24, Ondrej Valousek wrote:
For --preserve[=ATTR_LIST] the usage message says "preserve the specified
attributes (default: mode,ownership,timestamps), if possible additional
attributes: context, links, xattr,"
Yes, but that's nothing about ACLs. The aim of this patch is to
> For --preserve[=ATTR_LIST] the usage message says "preserve the specified
> attributes (default: mode,ownership,timestamps), if possible additional
> attributes: context, links, xattr,"
Yes, but that's nothing about ACLs. The aim of this patch is to clarify the
current behavior which might
On 2023-01-25 00:26, Ondrej Valousek wrote:
Doesn't the earlier part of the --help output already say something similar when
it mentions xattr? It's OK for the --help output to be somewhat terse, with >
longwinded details in the manual.
No, I do not see a word there about ACLs
For
> Doesn't the earlier part of the --help output already say something similar
> when it mentions xattr? It's OK for the --help output to be somewhat terse,
> with > longwinded details in the manual.
No, I do not see a word there about ACLs
On 1/24/23 00:42, Ondrej Valousek wrote:
+"), stdout);
+ fputs (_("\
+\n\
+--preserve=mode also copies ACLs but only if the destination filesystem\n\
+supports ACLs of the same type (i.e. no Posix <> NFSv4 ACLs conversion)\n\
Doesn't the earlier part of the --help output already say
Improve help to clarify ACL handling
---
src/cp.c | 5 +
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/src/cp.c b/src/cp.c
index 016ae8988..73ffd34e9 100644
--- a/src/cp.c
+++ b/src/cp.c
@@ -239,6 +239,11 @@ When --reflink[=always] is specified, perform a
lightweight copy, where the\n\
data
16 matches
Mail list logo
