Jonathan Chetwynd <j.chetwynd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > git clone ../xsl-test/ > > the original has a single directory, owner _www, and a few files. > > however the clone directory has owner Me. > > what is the reason permissions are not preserved? Why should permissions be preserved? Git is a version control system, meant mainly for software management, not a backup system. When you clone repository from somebody, you don't want for files to have that somebody ownership, especially that such user most probably do not exist on your machine. Therefore git does not store ownership, and only basic permissions (only executable bit for ordinary files, and the symlink bit). -- Jakub Narebski Poland ShadeHawk on #git -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html