Re: lynx-dev Lynx 2.8.3 with nmh problems

[Klaus Weide]

> > I didn't think about dired; but I think we shouldn't "repair umask". 
> > If lynx gets invoked with a certain umask, in general the assumption 
> > should be that that's what is desired. 
> 
On Mon, 8 May 100, T.E.Dickey wrote:
> I had in mind ensuring that if read permission is not masked, execute
> shouldn't be either

Why?

> (a simple mask/shift/mask operation).  With Unix
> permissions set up as they are, that's an got to be an error.

Again, why?  Are you thinking about directories, or regular files,
or both?

It seems reasonable that something like mhshow wants to mask out the
'x' but (of course) not 'r', as a precaution against creating
executable files by accident.  Well, they probably didn't think about
directories at all; but any helper invoked from mhshow that is complex
enough to create directories (and needs search permission in them)
should make sure the directories are created with the necessary
permission.  For other operations, certainly where it doesn't
interfere with basic functionality of the helper (here: lynx), the
helper should honor the umask of the caller.

  Klaus



; To UNSUBSCRIBE: Send "unsubscribe lynx-dev" to address@hidden