Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Sun, 15 Dec 1996 06:38:43 -0500 (EST) | From | Kevin M Bealer <> | Subject | Re: Proposal: restrict link(2) |
| |
I was curious about the subject, and noticed to my suprise that I could link to files owned by root, leaving the links in /tmp.... but I could not delete the link.
Now I suppose that this makes sense, after all:
1. I can't assume ownership since I could then change perms. 2. Root owns the file, so I can't delete it. 3. I could delete it from my home directory since I own that. ----> but in /tmp the sticky bit is set.
This suggests that the sticky bit already DOES imply different semantics here. I can create all the links I want of files into /tmp but cannot remove them.
IMHO --> The current semantics are inconsistent.
The idea of the sticky bit is that you can create and delete your _own_ files. This semantic is ignore by link(2), which is using the semantic for a privately owned non-sticky directory.
--kmb203@psu.edu---------------Debian/GNU--1.2---Linux--2.0.25--- Develop free apps? http://www.jagunet.com/~braddock/fslu/org ----------------------------------------------------------------- Probable-Possible, my black hen, She lays eggs in the Relative When. She doesn't lay eggs in the Positive Now Because she's unable to postulate how. -- Frederick Winsor
|  |