Community technical support mailing list was retired 2010 and replaced with a professional technical support team. For assistance please contact: Pre-sales Technical support via email to sales@march-hare.com.
Hello, the ACLs are giving me some head scratching every now and then. I like the way they work now, but have a few comments and questions. First comment is that the form the parameters get passed to the command doesn't lend itself well to routing calls to cvs through a batch file. The batch file interprets the comma (as in "-a read,write") as parameter separator and passes this on with a space (as in "-a read write"). Not sure that is relevant for many, but it's for me... Secondly I have a question about the recursiveness. The manual says that the ACLs are recursive; that is, the effective permissions in a given directory are the overlay of all permissions set in all parent directories. Yet it seems that the command (r)lsacl returns only the permissions set for the particular directory it gets called for (that is in essence a subset of the contents of a single fileattr.xml). Is there a way to retrieve the /effective/ permissions on a given module? Or do I always have to run (r)lsacl on the module and all parent modules and perform the overlay manually? Third: are there default, overriding ACLs for administrators? Or do I have to add them? (I have set all to "none" in the root, and then allow individually the modules.) Fourth: Many (if not all) files/directories don't have an owner now (at least that's what lsacl says at first). They seem to get associated to me as owner, e.g. after I change the ACLs on them (again according to lsacl). Is that something I should be concerned about? Oh, and this is all with client and server 2.5.03 b2151 :) Thanks, Gerhard