Let's suppose a source with a very huge number of files on it, with a very deep directory structure. If if goes bigger than bash expansion of maximum command line size chmod would fail and leave some files with unchanged permissions.
I don't understand, through, why the find + xargs approach. What happened to -execdir, simpler than that? find -L . \ \( -perm 777 -o -perm 775 -o -perm 750 -o -perm 711 -o -perm 555 \ -o -perm 511 \) -execdir 755 {} \; find -L . \ \( -perm 666 -o -perm 664 -o -perm 640 -o -perm 600 -o -perm 444 \ -o -perm 440 -o -perm 400 \) -execdir {} \; Em 13 de 03 de 2016 às 09:26:07T+0100, Andrzej Telszewski <atelszew...@gmail.com> escreveu: > On 13/03/16 02:18, Luís Fernando Carvalho Cavalheiro wrote: > > I'd stick with find solution. If a source has more files than chmod can > > handle (or perhaps bash can do, since there may be a limitation on * > > expansion), it would fail to set desired permissions to files. > > > > Em 13 de 03 de 2016 às 08:11:12T+0700, Willy Sudiarto Raharjo > > <will...@slackbuilds.org> escreveu: > > > >>>> Are you opposed to this solution? > >>>> > >>>> find -L . \ > >>>> \( -perm 777 -o -perm 775 -o -perm 750 -o -perm 711 -o -perm 555 \ > >>>> -o -perm 511 \) -print0 | \ > >>>> xargs -0 chmod 755 > >>>> find -L . \ > >>>> \( -perm 666 -o -perm 664 -o -perm 640 -o -perm 600 -o -perm 444 \ > >>>> -o -perm 440 -o -perm 400 \) -print0 | \ > >>>> xargs -0 chmod 644 > >>>> > >>>> It was proposed by B. Watson here: > >>>> > >>>> https://lists.slackbuilds.org/pipermail/slackbuilds-users/2015-November/015210.html > >>>> > >>>> It seems to work the same as the current template, but is just less > >>>> resource intensive ... but I don't know for sure. > >>> > >>> I honestly thought we had agreed to make this change, that another > >>> admin (rworkman?) agreed too. I read through that thread just now and I > >>> don't see it.. so maybe it happened on IRC, or not at all. > >>> > >>> Maybe another admin, rworkman or willysr, could put forward their > >>> thoughts on this change. I don't immediately see any problems with it, > >>> except possibly the amount of arguments chmod can take? (which may > >>> actually be a bash limitation) I suppose we know the answer to that > >>> since all 18k+ files from the mame source worked fine? If that seems to > >>> be the truth, as in all of those files got hit, and not say 100 or 1000 > >>> or whatever the command line limit might be, then I'm in favor of this > >>> change. I'm not really in a position to run some tests to find out, > >>> though. > >>> > >>> If any of that sounds confusing, what I'm imagining is passing 18k+ > >>> file names to chmod, and I seem to remember that type of thing being an > >>> issue in the past. I apologize in advance if that isn't true or I'm > >>> being ignorant on exactly what's happening in the above code. > >> > >> I have no objection at all if it's proven to work faster and same > >> results as the current find code. > >> > >> rworkman already mentioned on another thread that he doesn't oppose to > >> this idea, but let me quote his reply on this : > >> > >> "I didn't see any opposition to this, and I don't have any, so if you > >> want to make a user branch within the template repo and ping me > >> about it, I'll be more than happy to merge it for 14.2. > >> > >> Once that's done, and once the current-wip branch gets merged to > >> master (after 14.2 beta/rc announcement) and we get moving a bit > >> heavier there, if you'd like to work up a branch to make the > >> changes in there, we'll definitely consider it. > >> > >> It will probably be worth touching base with us first on that one, > >> because you'll want to minimize the merge conflicts that we are > >> creating while you're doing the changes there" > >> > >> the current condition is now current-wip branch is merged to master, > >> Beta 2 has been announced, but no one is up for the move. > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Willy Sudiarto Raharjo > >> > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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/ > > > > So, is the single chmod: > chmod -R u+w,go-w,a+rX-st . > > definitely lost? > > Why can't we use this solution? > > -- > 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/ > -- 93 93/93 Luís Fernando Carvalho Cavalheiro
pgpJlz7_g8RCB.pgp
Description: Assinatura digital OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ 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/