Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2007 20:11:55 -0700 From: Marcus Reid <marcus@blazingdot.com> To: mato <gamato@users.sf.net> Cc: Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports system and umask Message-ID: <20070905031155.GA14348@blazingdot.com> In-Reply-To: <46DAE9AF.8020706@users.sf.net> References: <20070830004020.GA58539@blazingdot.com> <fbbqfi$va7$1@sea.gmane.org> <46DA98A3.5030204@FreeBSD.org> <46DAE9AF.8020706@users.sf.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Sep 02, 2007 at 06:49:51PM +0200, mato wrote: > Kris Kennaway wrote: > >martinko wrote: > >> > >>We have similar problems here -- default umask is set to 027 and > >>therefore one needs to always remember changing it to 022 prior > >>installing any ports or packages. > >>Been bitten many times because of this. :-\ > >> > >>Martin > > > >There is an argument that if you set the umask then you are getting > >exactly what you ask for :) > > > >Kris > > Yes, you're right, and it works for us and I can imagine many situations > people change default umask. But IMHO it doesn't make sense for > ports/packages as installing them with non-default umask effectively > renders them unusable. Therefore it seems to me that either ignoring > umask or at least warning people umask is changed would be correct in > this case. > > Martin I think a warning would be a good compromise between second-guessing the user and silently breaking things. Marcus
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070905031155.GA14348>