From owner-freebsd-bugs Wed Oct 23 01:55:42 1996 Return-Path: owner-bugs Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id BAA06812 for bugs-outgoing; Wed, 23 Oct 1996 01:55:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from irz301.inf.tu-dresden.de (irz301.inf.tu-dresden.de [141.76.1.11]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id BAA06712; Wed, 23 Oct 1996 01:51:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sax.sax.de (sax.sax.de [193.175.26.33]) by irz301.inf.tu-dresden.de (8.6.12/8.6.12-s1) with ESMTP id KAA24051; Wed, 23 Oct 1996 10:51:26 +0200 Received: (from uucp@localhost) by sax.sax.de (8.6.12/8.6.12-s1) with UUCP id KAA16661; Wed, 23 Oct 1996 10:51:25 +0200 Received: (from j@localhost) by uriah.heep.sax.de (8.7.6/8.6.9) id KAA24918; Wed, 23 Oct 1996 10:29:57 +0200 (MET DST) From: J Wunsch Message-Id: <199610230829.KAA24918@uriah.heep.sax.de> Subject: Re: kern/1336 To: jkh@time.cdrom.com (Jordan K. Hubbard) Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 10:29:57 +0200 (MET DST) Cc: scrappy@freefall.freebsd.org, freebsd-bugs@freefall.freebsd.org Reply-To: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de (Joerg Wunsch) In-Reply-To: <7363.846045265@time.cdrom.com> from "Jordan K. Hubbard" at "Oct 22, 96 09:34:25 pm" X-Phone: +49-351-2012 669 X-PGP-Fingerprint: DC 47 E6 E4 FF A6 E9 8F 93 21 E0 7D F9 12 D6 4E X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL17 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk As Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: > No, not to my knowledge. > > > Synopsis: Permission for .. in NFS mounts is somewhat non-intuitive > > > > State-Changed-From-To: open-feedback > > State-Changed-By: scrappy > > State-Changed-When: Tue Oct 22 21:13:33 PDT 1996 > > State-Changed-Why: > > > > Has this been addressed? Ah, the mountpoint permission problem. It's a well-known problem, and not only NFS is affected. You could get the same funny behaviour by turning, say, your /var mountpoint into mode 0700 (with /var not yet mounted, of course), and then start over your system... We should document that mount points will be best with permission 555 or something like that (the actual permissions are always shadowed later), and close the PR. At least, we should move it to `suspended' state since nobody seems to step forward and solve the underlying problem. -- cheers, J"org joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de -- http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ -- NIC: JW11-RIPE Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)