Re: [Bug-tar] adding ACLs when there are none

[Pavel Raiskup]

On Wednesday, March 05, 2014 05:06:06 Linda A. Walsh wrote:
> Pavel Raiskup wrote:
> > Or could you give an example?  What *exactly* do you expect the --acls
> > should behave by default?  Combine existing acls in parent directory
> > (default acls) with the stored in archive?
> >
> > Thanks, Pavel
> >
> -----

> If the SetGid bit is set on a directory on linux, it is usually
> propagated to lower lower level dirs to permit a particular type of
> access to be propagated to  lower level files and dirs.

The _default_ seems to be matter of taste.  Looking at how the SetGid
works in GNU tar, the bit is inherited from parent by default (no
additional option passed).  But when you specify '-p' option, then the bit
is not inherited as you want (the permissions stored in archive have a
priority).  I would rather take --acls similarly to -p in this regard.

> If a default acl is set on a dir I see it used in the same way.
> ----
> Sorry, didn't finish that thought...If there are default acls set in the
> tar, they would replace such default acls that are present, but
> undefined ACLs in the tar wouldn't overwrite set acl's that propagate
> from the parent.

And what if you want to combine default ACLs somehow?

Also what if you want the inherited (not in archive-stored) ACLs to affect
also all extracted files?

I agree that you may want to specify exact behavior.  The --acls could
take optional arguments like --acls=inherit-defaults (your scenario).
Possibly --acls=combine (in future) to merge as much as possible (little
bit more work here would be needed).  Thoughts?

Pavel