|
Bugzilla – Full Text Bug Listing |
| Summary: | behavior of acl permissions | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [openSUSE] SUSE LINUX 10.0 | Reporter: | Tim Fechtner <timmi> |
| Component: | Basesystem | Assignee: | E-mail List <bnc-team-screening> |
| Status: | VERIFIED INVALID | QA Contact: | E-mail List <qa-bugs> |
| Severity: | Normal | ||
| Priority: | P5 - None | ||
| Version: | Final | ||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | Other | ||
| OS: | Other | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Found By: | Other | Services Priority: | |
| Business Priority: | Blocker: | --- | |
| Marketing QA Status: | --- | IT Deployment: | --- |
|
Description
Tim Fechtner
2006-02-09 07:23:45 UTC
That's indeed a little strange, timi should get write access to the directory because comined group|testgroup he has rwx on that directory - but maby this is intended? In this example, it first works after user has all permission bits and would probably also work if testgroup had all bits. Andreas: Do we understand something wrong here? Is this intended? The acl manpage doesn't even mention the word union. With the first acl, user timi has read+execute and write access, so he can open a file for reading, or writing, but not for read + write. ACL entries do not combine. For creating something in a directory you need write + execute. A single entry must grant both write and execute, or else access will be denied. Thanks for the clarification. Also thanks for the clarification. |