From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Steve French" Subject: Re: [PATCH] CIFS should honour umask Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2007 12:01:57 -0500 Message-ID: <524f69650706071001q30a818eepfef98010258b14f7@mail.gmail.com> References: <466705F5.9000702@opcode-solutions.com> <524f69650706061723i3e065d0y83739e50d986a06f@mail.gmail.com> <4667AE70.7090800@opcode-solutions.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: matt@opcode-solutions.com To: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-cifs-client@lists.samba.org Return-path: Received: from py-out-1112.google.com ([64.233.166.177]:30145 "EHLO py-out-1112.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751749AbXFGRB6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Jun 2007 13:01:58 -0400 Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id a29so950529pyi for ; Thu, 07 Jun 2007 10:01:58 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4667AE70.7090800@opcode-solutions.com> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org For the non-unix case (e.g. Windows servers) the mode will be taken from the default specified on the mount. I am not sure if we also should add code to also honor umask in that case. I am not sure how common it is to change umask to different values in different processes which would access the same mount. Thoughts? > Steve French wrote: > > Thanks - it looks almost right but you missed mknod case and your > > patch had some whitespace/formatting problems. > > > > Could you try the following and make sure it works for you? If so > > will merge.