If I have acls enabled on a file, running chmod g=rw on that file,
will not change its group permissions, but the acl mask.
That is, running the following command:
$ chmod g=rw foo
... is equivalent with
$ setfacl -m m::rw-
... and not, as I would suspect:
$ setfacl -m
. It might be the correct
bahaviour, but if so maybe the chmod(1) manpage, and possibly
chmod(2), should be updated to document this?
Svein Halvor
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/ACLs%2C-permission-mask-and-chmod-g%3D-tp18893185p18899706.html
Sent from
acmeinc wrote:
You may consider trying chmod 660 filename.
It gives the same result. When changing group permission (either
way) on a file with acls, you're effectively changing the acl mask
instead. Also, if I change acl mask with setfacl, then ls -l will
list the permission mask in the group
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/ACLs%2C-permission-mask-and-chmod-g%3D-tp18893185p18900042.html
Sent from the freebsd-questions mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
acmeinc wrote:
One last thing
have you tried;
setfacl -s
setfacl -s is not documented, and also gives illegal option -- s
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
