2015-05-13 22:38 GMT+02:00 Frank Filz <ffilzlnx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > So inheritance will happen, but there is also a mode set as part of the create that I assume > is effectively handled the same as a subsequent chmod() on the file? The effect is similar to a subsequent chmod except that the effective permissions may be fewer then the create mode: * In the traditional POSIX case, the effective permissions are (create_mode & ~umask). * With POSIX ACLs and Richacls, if there are inheritable permissions, the effective permissions are the intersection of the create mode and the maximum permissions the inherited acl grants. So if the inherited acl grants at most rwxr-x---, with a create mode of rw-rw-rw, the effective permissions end up being rw-r-----. > Any chance we could add a system call to do a open/create and pass an ACL > (and heck, if we go there, why not a system call that allows creating with mtime, > atime, owner, etc. also...). Send patches, but expect them to get killed :) > Is there a mode that we could pass that would cause the least amount > of damage to the inherited ACL? Yes, 0777. But the RICHACL_PROTECTED flag will still be set, and that is the problem in this case. Andreas -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
