On 24/02/16 16:14, Erik Hanson wrote:
On Wed, 24 Feb 2016 08:22:43 +0100
Andrzej Telszewski <atelszew...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 24/02/16 07:37, Kyle Guinn wrote:
On 2/23/16, Andrzej Telszewski <atelszew...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 05/02/16 13:48, Martijn Dekker wrote:
2. The following horrible, broken and obsolete eyesore:
find -L . \
\( -perm 777 -o -perm 775 -o -perm 750 -o -perm 711 -o -perm
555 \ -o -perm 511 \) -exec chmod 755 {} \; -o \
\( -perm 666 -o -perm 664 -o -perm 640 -o -perm 600 -o -perm
444 \ -o -perm 440 -o -perm 400 \) -exec chmod 644 {} \;
can be replaced by:
chmod -R a-st,u+rwX,go-w+rX .
I advocate this solution.
Can we switch for it?
Or at least would the SlackBuild be accepted if I used this
construct?
Even shorter and simpler to understand:
chmod -R u+w,go-w,a+rX-st .
Yep, even nicer ;)
These 'hammer everything' solutions change permissions on files that
the find command specifically misses, which may have been set on purpose
by upstream.
Can you elaborate?
Note that I'm not adverse to submissions using a single chmod line,
many of my scripts did this in the past. It requires an extra level
of awareness though, that might be a trap for new players. For the
template, we should leave the find command in place. Bulk swapping
them out in the repo is not an option.
Depends on who you ask;) For me it's the "find magic" that always has
been something I've never even tried to understand;) On the other side,
chmod approach is crystal clear.
--
Best regards,
Andrzej Telszewski
_______________________________________________
SlackBuilds-users mailing list
SlackBuilds-users@slackbuilds.org
http://lists.slackbuilds.org/mailman/listinfo/slackbuilds-users
Archives - http://lists.slackbuilds.org/pipermail/slackbuilds-users/
FAQ - http://slackbuilds.org/faq/
