From owner-freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 28 09:10:03 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-standards@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68A5A16A478 for ; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 09:10:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58F3A13C442 for ; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 09:10:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (gnats@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m0S9A37M002361 for ; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 09:10:03 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.2/8.14.1/Submit) id m0S9A370002360; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 09:10:03 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 09:10:03 GMT Message-Id: <200801280910.m0S9A370002360@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.org From: David Schultz Cc: Subject: Re: standards/86484: [PATCH] mkfifo(1) uses wrong permissions X-BeenThere: freebsd-standards@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: David Schultz List-Id: Standards compliance List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 09:10:03 -0000 The following reply was made to PR standards/86484; it has been noted by GNATS. From: David Schultz To: rwatson@FreeBSD.ORG Cc: toby@apple.com, freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: standards/86484: [PATCH] mkfifo(1) uses wrong permissions Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2008 23:17:03 -0500 POSIX's description of how umask interacts with -m for various tools is a maze of twisting little references, all different; it wouldn't surprise me if they meant something other than what they said. :) To take a step back, I would argue that mkfifo(1), mkdir(1), and install(1) should all have similar semantics with respect to -m, to reduce confusion. What those semantics are, I'm not sure. Solaris 10 seems to behave as FreeBSD does, and Linux 2.6.12 seems to behave as Toby Petersin wants FreeBSD to behave.