Re: [Gnu-arch-users] BUG: feature request: 'tla chmod' which 'touch'es files

[Robin Farine]

On Sunday 26 September 2004 23.10, Zenaan Harkness wrote:

> <sarcasm tone=biting>
> Oh I forgot - of course, there's no other way to achieve
> read-only revlibs without completely dropping version management
> of perms. Couldn't possibly be done any other way. Bitkeeper
> clearly uses fairy dust to achieve this.
> </>

I meant dropping the current scheme completely ('x' bits included) 
but I mentioned elsewhere that alternatives exist that do not rely 
on archiving a subset of actual UNIX filesystem object permissions, 
which realize only a small subset of the relevant use cases.

For instance, to maintain my system configurations under Arch 
control, I would need to archive anything dealing with access 
rights, i.e. owner, group and rwxst bits so that I can edit these 
configurations as a standard user, and deploy a revision as root at 
which time access rights are applied to the filesystem objects.

Another example is working on a UNIX system on Windows NT files. Who 
cares about the rwxst stuff, we want to archive a set of NT ACLs. 
And so on.

Robin