lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1996]   [Jul]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: How does chown(2) works with symlinks?
    Date
    > 
    > In article <m0ud2oF-000h9vC@amador.org>,
    > Orlando M. Amador <oamador@amador.org> wrote:
    > :Which file gets changed when a call to chown(2) is done on a symlink?
    > :The man page gives the impression that it would follow the symlink and
    > :change the owner of the file pointed by the symlink. Still, if a used
    > :chown on a symlink now, it will only change the symlink. Was there a
    > :change to the way it works?
    >
    > I don't see anything in the manpage that suggests that. In any event,
    > there is one place where the ownership of the link itself is significant
    > (deleting the link from a directory which has it's sticky bit set), so
    > it makes sense to have a way to change that ownership. It's 'chmod'
    > that follows the link and affects the target, since the permission bits
    > on the symbolic link itself are meaningless.
    >
    > --
    > Bob Nichols rnichols@interaccess.com
    >
    >

    The fact that chmod(2) could return an 'ELOOP' error (According to
    manpages 1.8) suggest that chmod() used to follow the symlink. This
    not the case anymore.

    Personally I think that it should resolve the symlink. Access and
    ownership should be controled by the file that the symlink points to.

    Saludos,
    Orlando

    --
    Orlando M. Amador oamador@amador.org
    Avenida Country Club #1027 (787) 898-5181
    Camuy, PR 00627 Fax: (787) 898-6686



    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:37    [W:4.121 / U:0.028 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site