[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: -perm +... What should still work, what should not?

From: Andreas Metzler
Subject: Re: -perm +... What should still work, what should not?
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 19:20:56 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.11

On 2005-10-02 James Youngman <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 02, 2005 at 03:42:38PM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> > I have not managed to wrapo my mind around the POSIX spec for which
> > uses of -perm +... actually conflict with POSIX and which should
> > continue to work. (NEWS: "Old usages will still continue to work, so
> > long as they don't conflict with POSIX.")

> Simply put - if the mode string, beginning with +, has a meaning in
> POSIX, then it is treated as an exact-match test.  Only if the mode
> is not valid under POSIX is '+mode' treated like '/mode'.

My problem is in deciding which kind of strings "has a
meaning in POSIX". e.g. +u+x or +g=w,u+x or ++s.
                 cu andreas
"See, I told you they'd listen to Reason," [SPOILER] Svfurlr fnlf,
fuhggvat qbja gur juveyvat tha.
Neal Stephenson in "Snow Crash"

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]