Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 22 Apr 1999 17:24:56 -0500 | From | Fuzzy Fox <> | Subject | Re: smbfs permissions problem (2.2.6ac1) |
| |
Mike Frisch <mfrisch@saturn.tlug.org> wrote: > > > Servers can implement permissions however they like. In Unix, > > permission to write the parent directory gives permission to delete. > > In Windows, read-only permission implies no-delete permission. > > Sorry, but this does not correspond to what I am seeing on said > Windows NT machine. On Windows NT, I have the same directory and the > same file in that directory marked read-only. If I do an rmdir /s/q > on said directory, it gets removed (even if it contains files marked > read-only).
That sounds like the exact opposite of what was originally posted, of being unable to remove a file when it is marked read-only. Now you're telling me that you have no trouble removing a read-only file.
> I believe the smbfs implementation is incorrect in this respect > assuming the functionality of "rmdir /s/q" on Windows NT an be equated > with that of "rm -rf" on Linux when dealing with the same directory > (one local, one shared).
I find that highly doubtful.
Anyway, I don't have any NT boxes to play with, but I do have Win98. It implements the behavior described in the original post, where read-only files cannot be deleted until the read-only status is removed. "rmdir" and "rm -rf" do not remove anything.
-- fox@dallas.net (Fuzzy Fox) || "Nothing takes the taste out of peanut sometimes known as David DeSimone || butter quite like unrequited love." http://www.dallas.net/~fox/ || -- Charlie Brown
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |