From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Aug 25 09:07:35 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AE941065691 for ; Tue, 25 Aug 2009 09:07:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from db@danielbond.org) Received: from mail.nsn.no (mailone.nsn.no [62.89.38.160]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id EA93C8FC0C for ; Tue, 25 Aug 2009 09:07:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 2349 invoked by uid 0); 25 Aug 2009 08:40:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?172.16.3.90?) (85.95.44.187) by mail.nsn.no with SMTP; 25 Aug 2009 08:40:52 -0000 Message-Id: <913F5042-AE21-4B80-9273-35132289959D@danielbond.org> From: Daniel Bond To: Colin Percival Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1; boundary="Apple-Mail-61-152025615" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v936) Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 10:40:48 +0200 References: <200908250828.n7P8SwIC056483@g5.nsn.no> X-Pgp-Agent: GPGMail 1.2.0 (v56) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.936) X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: [PATCH] Portsnap - set a good umask, for ports consistancy X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 09:07:35 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --Apple-Mail-61-152025615 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, I have a case where some users have different umasks (0077 in some cases). When these users call portsnap (via sudo), it leaves the port- directories permissions in an inconsistent state, and people need to use sudo to list files. I'm not sure honoring "umask" is good from a users-perspective, even if umask is a standard UNIX mechanism of directory and file permissions. I suggest setting a reasonable umask, for the duration of the portsnap program. As far as I know, this should only effect /usr/ports, and if a user wishes to "hide" the contents of this folder, a manual chmod of it should not be overridden, until /usr/ports is completely removed and recreated. If this is a bad suggestion, would it be feasible to make it a config- option? BTW, I really like portsnap - it is a great program. Also I'd like to note that I am very happy with speed from european mirrors these days, which I've been grunting about earlier. Thanks for the effort you put into this! :) Best regards, Daniel Bond. Begin forwarded message: > From: Daniel Bond > Date: August 25, 2009 10:28:58 AM GMT+02:00 > To: db@danielbond.org > Subject: [PATCH] Portsnap - set a good umask, for ports consistancy > --Apple-Mail-61-152025615 content-type: application/pgp-signature; x-mac-type=70674453; name=PGP.sig content-description: This is a digitally signed message part content-disposition: inline; filename=PGP.sig content-transfer-encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.11 (Darwin) iEYEARECAAYFAkqTo5QACgkQF4Ca8+3pySX+LwCdH8Yax+CBLhxj+kKokNrUE+KX XMkAoNkTMFg0aguEFNY7/RUI0AxIp/GG =qyYV -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail-61-152025615--