[lkml]   [1999]   [Apr]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: smbfs permissions problem (2.2.6ac1)
Mike Frisch <> 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.

-- (Fuzzy Fox) || "Nothing takes the taste out of peanut
sometimes known as David DeSimone || butter quite like unrequited love." || -- Charlie Brown

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:51    [W:0.042 / U:4.568 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site