Re: umask not working?

2018-03-21 Thread Andrey Repin
Greetings, Achim Gratz! > David Allsopp writes: >>> You have extended ACL on the object. And overall, umask is not a good >>> idea in Windows. >> >> "umask is not a good idea in Windows" - where's that come from? > Ask three people and get at least seven answers. > Actually Windows is a red

Re: umask not working?

2018-03-21 Thread Brian Inglis
On 2018-03-21 12:47, Achim Gratz wrote: > David Allsopp writes: >>> You have extended ACL on the object. And overall, umask is not a good >>> idea in Windows. >> >> "umask is not a good idea in Windows" - where's that come from? > > Ask three people and get at least seven answers. > > Actually

Re: umask not working?

2018-03-21 Thread Achim Gratz
David Allsopp writes: >> You have extended ACL on the object. And overall, umask is not a good >> idea in Windows. > > "umask is not a good idea in Windows" - where's that come from? Ask three people and get at least seven answers. Actually Windows is a red herring IMHO, it's the combination of

RE: umask not working?

2018-03-21 Thread David Allsopp
Ken Brown wrote: > On 3/21/2018 6:36 AM, David Allsopp wrote: > > Ken Brown > >> On 3/19/2018 8:48 AM, David Allsopp wrote: > >>> Is this expected behaviour: > >>> > >>> OPAM+DRA@OPAM ~ > >>> $ uname -a ; umask ; touch /tmp/foo ; ls -l /tmp/foo ; mkdir > >>> /tmp/bar ; touch /tmp/bar/foo ; ls -l

Re: git checkout altering mode of file [WAS: umask not working?]

2018-03-21 Thread cyg Simple
On 3/21/2018 6:27 AM, David Allsopp wrote: > > "umask is not a good idea in Windows" - where's that come from? (In the > actual scenario where I'm being bitten by this, it's because a git checkout > is altering files which were 644 to be 664, so whether it's precisely umask > or not, the

Re: umask not working?

2018-03-21 Thread Ken Brown
On 3/21/2018 6:36 AM, David Allsopp wrote: Ken Brown On 3/19/2018 8:48 AM, David Allsopp wrote: Is this expected behaviour: OPAM+DRA@OPAM ~ $ uname -a ; umask ; touch /tmp/foo ; ls -l /tmp/foo ; mkdir /tmp/bar ; touch /tmp/bar/foo ; ls -l /tmp/bar/foo CYGWIN_NT-6.1-WOW OPAM 2.10.0(0.325/5/3)

Re: umask not working?

2018-03-21 Thread Andrey Repin
Greetings, David Allsopp! > Andrey Repin wrote: >> Greetings, David Allsopp! >> >> > Is this expected behaviour: >> >> > OPAM+DRA@OPAM ~ >> > $ uname -a ; umask ; touch /tmp/foo ; ls -l /tmp/foo ; mkdir /tmp/bar >> > ; touch /tmp/bar/foo ; ls -l /tmp/bar/foo CYGWIN_NT-6.1-WOW OPAM >> >

RE: umask not working?

2018-03-21 Thread David Allsopp
Ken Brown > On 3/19/2018 8:48 AM, David Allsopp wrote: > > Is this expected behaviour: > > > > OPAM+DRA@OPAM ~ > > $ uname -a ; umask ; touch /tmp/foo ; ls -l /tmp/foo ; mkdir /tmp/bar > > ; touch /tmp/bar/foo ; ls -l /tmp/bar/foo CYGWIN_NT-6.1-WOW OPAM > > 2.10.0(0.325/5/3) 2018-02-02 15:21 i686

RE: umask not working?

2018-03-21 Thread David Allsopp
Andrey Repin wrote: > Greetings, David Allsopp! > > > Is this expected behaviour: > > > OPAM+DRA@OPAM ~ > > $ uname -a ; umask ; touch /tmp/foo ; ls -l /tmp/foo ; mkdir /tmp/bar > > ; touch /tmp/bar/foo ; ls -l /tmp/bar/foo CYGWIN_NT-6.1-WOW OPAM > > 2.10.0(0.325/5/3) 2018-02-02 15:21 i686

Re: umask not working?

2018-03-19 Thread Ken Brown
On 3/19/2018 8:48 AM, David Allsopp wrote: Is this expected behaviour: OPAM+DRA@OPAM ~ $ uname -a ; umask ; touch /tmp/foo ; ls -l /tmp/foo ; mkdir /tmp/bar ; touch /tmp/bar/foo ; ls -l /tmp/bar/foo CYGWIN_NT-6.1-WOW OPAM 2.10.0(0.325/5/3) 2018-02-02 15:21 i686 Cygwin 0022 -rw-r--r-- 1 OPAM+DRA

Re: umask not working?

2018-03-19 Thread Andrey Repin
Greetings, David Allsopp! > Is this expected behaviour: > OPAM+DRA@OPAM ~ > $ uname -a ; umask ; touch /tmp/foo ; ls -l /tmp/foo ; mkdir /tmp/bar ; > touch /tmp/bar/foo ; ls -l /tmp/bar/foo > CYGWIN_NT-6.1-WOW OPAM 2.10.0(0.325/5/3) 2018-02-02 15:21 i686 Cygwin > 0022 > -rw-r--r-- 1 OPAM+DRA

Re: EXTERNAL: umask not working?

2018-03-19 Thread Wells, Roger K.
On 03/19/2018 08:49 AM, David Allsopp wrote: Is this expected behaviour: OPAM+DRA@OPAM ~ $ uname -a ; umask ; touch /tmp/foo ; ls -l /tmp/foo ; mkdir /tmp/bar ; touch /tmp/bar/foo ; ls -l /tmp/bar/foo CYGWIN_NT-6.1-WOW OPAM 2.10.0(0.325/5/3) 2018-02-02 15:21 i686 Cygwin 0022 -rw-r--r-- 1

umask not working?

2018-03-19 Thread David Allsopp
Is this expected behaviour: OPAM+DRA@OPAM ~ $ uname -a ; umask ; touch /tmp/foo ; ls -l /tmp/foo ; mkdir /tmp/bar ; touch /tmp/bar/foo ; ls -l /tmp/bar/foo CYGWIN_NT-6.1-WOW OPAM 2.10.0(0.325/5/3) 2018-02-02 15:21 i686 Cygwin 0022 -rw-r--r-- 1 OPAM+DRA OPAM+None 0 Mar 19 13:44 /tmp/foo