From owner-freebsd-bugs Wed Oct 23 04:22:52 1996 Return-Path: owner-bugs Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA13315 for bugs-outgoing; Wed, 23 Oct 1996 04:22:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lassie.eunet.fi (lassie.eunet.fi [192.26.119.7]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id EAA13310 for ; Wed, 23 Oct 1996 04:22:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from marathon.tekla.fi by lassie.eunet.fi with SMTP id AA19888 (5.67a/IDA-1.5 for ); Wed, 23 Oct 1996 14:22:33 +0300 Received: from poveri.tekla.fi by marathon.tekla.fi (5.65/20-jun-90) id AA19267; Wed, 23 Oct 1996 13:22:30 +0200 From: sja@tekla.fi (Sakari Jalovaara) Received: by poveri.tekla.fi; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/20Aug96-0557PM) id AA29064; Wed, 23 Oct 1996 14:22:31 +0300 Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 14:22:31 +0300 Message-Id: <9610231122.AA29064@poveri.tekla.fi> To: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: kern/1336 Sender: owner-bugs@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk >> > Synopsis: Permission for .. in NFS mounts is somewhat non-intuitive > Ah, the mountpoint permission problem. It's a well-known problem, and > not only NFS is affected. [...] > > 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. Perhaps make mount(8) warn if the permissions of a mount point are unreasonable? Nice both for new sysadmins and old farts who think they can't make such mistakes. if ((mount_point_stat.st_mode & 0555) != 0555) warn("rtfm \"man 8 mount\""); ++sja