Subject: Re: [netatalk-admins] the big step...
From: Rick Zeman (rzeman@his.com)
Date: Sun Mar 21 1999 - 11:45:54 EST
On 3/21/99 9:44 AM, Palle Girgensohn <girgen@partitur.se> said:
>Rick Zeman wrote:
>>
>> On 3/21/99 9:17 AM, Eddie Irvine <eirvine@tpgi.com.au> said:
>>
>> >Hi, Rick.
>> >
>> >I think you need to look at setting the "sticky bit" on any
>> >"global" directory - that is, any directory that is mounted
>> >by everyone - I assume you mean a directory called "/mac".
>> >man chmod.
>>
>> Correct. I actually just added another filesystem with /mac being the
>> mountpoint with perms of 667. man chmod doesn't mention anything about a
>> sticky bit.
>
>Aren't you running Unix? Sorry, but what dialect of Un*x does not
>mention sticky bits in chmod(1)? Sounds funny... try chmod(2), perhaps?
>Here's excerpts from one of my chmod(1)s:
RedHat 5.2. Info was in chmod(2), not in (1).
[...]
>
>I use sticky bits a lot to share stuff between a group of users.
>Usually, i use the sticky group bit ( chmod g+s ) and add all users to
>that unix group, and somehow force an umask of 002. The umask stuff
>cannot be modified with netatalk, but it seems to use 002 by default, so
>that's OK. It would be great to have a config for this in netatalk,
>though... I use it with samba on the same volume.
Say I have a group called macusers with the mac users as the only
members. I do a chmod g+s macusers -R to apply that to the heirarchy.
Right now, all of the files are owned by me (user rzeman) since I copied
them in.
If I go to a differnet workstation, using a different login...I can still
delete the files that I'm an owner of--as another user. Gack. I don't
understand this.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Sat Dec 18 1999 - 16:16:29 EST