Tommy
--On Thursday, December 19, 2002 04:47:46 PM -0700 Ben Dugdale <turtlendog@rmusd.net> wrote:
Perhaps a dumb question but... In this example, shouldn't the permissions of 'foo' be rwxrwxrwx with a umask of 000 unless foo was a pre-existing file? Your permissions are what I would expect with a umask of 111, but it works the same here (as your example). Jesse Keating wrote:On Thu, 19 Dec 2002 15:02:30 -0500 "Eric Wood" <eric@interplas.com> wrote:But when a new child process spawns (say a shell script), the umask is not inherited. Is there a fix for that?I can't duplicate that either. [jkeating@yoda temp]$ umask 000 [jkeating@yoda temp]$ ./script 0000 Touching foo total 20 drwxrwxr-x 3 jkeating jkeating 4096 Dec 19 12:11 . drwx------ 97 jkeating jkeating 8192 Dec 19 12:10 .. -rw-rw-rw- 1 jkeating jkeating 0 Dec 19 12:11 foo [jkeating@yoda temp]$ cat script # !/bin/sh echo `umask` echo "Touching foo" touch foo echo ls -al exit 0--- [This E-mail scanned for viruses] -- Psyche-list mailing list Psyche-list@redhat.com https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/psyche-list
-- Tommy McNeely -- Tommy.McNeely@Sun.COM Sun Microsystems - IT Ops - Broomfield Campus Support Phone: x50888 / 303-464-4888 -- Fax: 720-566-3168 -- Psyche-list mailing list Psyche-list@redhat.com https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/psyche-list
