Re: lynx-dev Lynx 2.8.3 with nmh problems

[T.E.Dickey]

> 
> > > 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? 

umask applies to 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 

actually it's an unusual condition (I don't recall many other applications
that have to circumvent broken umask's).

> 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 
> 


-- 
Thomas E. Dickey  <address@hidden>
http://dickey.his.com
ftp://dickey.his.com

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