From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [Census] So who uses git? Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 21:42:47 -0800 Message-ID: <7vy80vmy7c.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <1138446030.9919.112.camel@evo.keithp.com> <7vzmlgt5zt.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <1138529385.9919.185.camel@evo.keithp.com> <43DCA495.9040301@gorzow.mm.pl> <20060130225107.GA3857@limbo.home> <20060131220148.GA19411@steel.home> <20060201013901.GA16832@mail.com> <7v64nzollt.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <20060201045337.GC25753@mail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Linus Torvalds , git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Feb 01 06:43:02 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1F4Ala-0000ua-F5 for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Wed, 01 Feb 2006 06:42:58 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030398AbWBAFmv (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Feb 2006 00:42:51 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030389AbWBAFmu (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Feb 2006 00:42:50 -0500 Received: from fed1rmmtao06.cox.net ([68.230.241.33]:10685 "EHLO fed1rmmtao06.cox.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030398AbWBAFmt (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Feb 2006 00:42:49 -0500 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.4.9.127]) by fed1rmmtao06.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with ESMTP id <20060201053945.QGAT20050.fed1rmmtao06.cox.net@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>; Wed, 1 Feb 2006 00:39:45 -0500 To: Ray Lehtiniemi In-Reply-To: <20060201045337.GC25753@mail.com> (Ray Lehtiniemi's message of "Tue, 31 Jan 2006 21:53:37 -0700") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110004 (No Gnus v0.4) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Ray Lehtiniemi writes: > what if the user wants to change the mode bits of an assume-unchanged > file with the twiddled permissions, but forgets to clear the flag > first? seems like that change is likely to get lost, especially if the > new mode is read-only.... No problem, since we only record u+x bit and nothing else. Most importantly, we do not record any of the +w bits.