Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Arch saving the setgid bit

[Robin Farine]

Charles Duffy wrote:

> Frankly, I'm almost of half a mind that version-controlling permissions
> at all should be togglable -- but then, that's the sort of thing which
> strikes me as being a disproportionate amount of work to provide a
> switch for, particularly given that I haven't seen other folks with
> similar complaints.
>  

I agree with you. If, instead of systematic permission versioning, we 
had the possibility of explicitly recording and explicitly replaying a 
tree's permissions (parameterized with a umask), we could let 
permissions aside most of the time.


Robin