Re: umask also influences test/rm/fail-2eperm

[anirkko]

> From address@hidden Fri May  4 13:37:02 2007

...
> Sure, I could work around such silliness by simply adding this
> near the beginning:
> 
>     # Protect against a ridiculously restrictive umask.
>     umask 077
> 
> However, I'm not sure it's worthwhile, since no one would use a umask
> prohibiting any of u=rwx for long.  And a similar change would be
> required for most other tests.

If all chmod commands in all tests set all u/g/o bits to a predefined
state, then umask doesn't matter anymore and it's failsafe (there might
be some semi-reasonable umask combinations we can not be bothered to
think about right now... ;-)

...
> If you can make it fail with a umask affecting only group/other
> bits, then please let me know.
> 
I only ever used either 'umask 000' or the standard 'umask 022'
(both  affecting only group/other bits) and the 3 tests menioned
failed. Strangely enough, tests/rm/fail-2eperm started failing
only after tests/rm/no-give-up started working. Nevertheless, the
change suggested (explicit chmod of all bits) makes the problem
go away in any case.

Arto