On 11/9/2018 1:16 PM, Anton Aylward wrote:
Thanks for response...I guess I'm unhappy with the inconsistencies and arbitrariness.
I don't know. The way you present it, it is, and I don;t think it is fair to compare Linux with CygWin.
They both attempt to provide some posix compatibility. However, the MS case, inodes are kept together in 1 area and content in another, though in a way that is true for linux as well. One thing that has never been clear is what permissions apply to metadata. Clearly things like last access are exempt from a read-only setting on the file. In this case, the read-only setting usually associated with the data and it is the settings on the directory that control access to the file's meta data:
mkdir a; cd a mkdir dir1 touch file1 chmod 000 dir1 file1 llg total 0 d--------- 2 law lawgroup 6 Nov 10 00:57 dir1/ ---------- 1 law lawgroup 0 Nov 10 00:57 file1
All of the metadata is visible. The ".." entry is not user-created content, but meta data of the file system to store a back ref to a parent. I wouldn't automatically believe that such an entry would (or should) forbid moving the directory.
From an administrative viewpoint, I can see the benefit of the current behavior, but from an engineer standpoint, explanations of the behavior seem a bit specious.
But whenever I've faced this on my machines and I've drilled down step by step I've always found out there was something I was missing, something I was supposing that wasn't so.
I present it here so someone might point that out to me, since I don't see it .
I can't look over your shoulder for the details; yes AS YOU PRESENT IT it is inconsistent.
That's why I present all of the details here, so you can look over your own shoulder and see if I am misrepresenting something, should you be so interested. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org