Re: x bit for dirs: misfeature?

vda
2001-11-20T11:06:27Z

On Monday 19 November 2001 19:07, James A Sutherland wrote:
> On Monday 19 November 2001 7:39 pm, vda wrote:
> > On Monday 19 November 2001 17:24, James A Sutherland wrote:
> > > > > Yes, I see... All I can do is to add workarounds (ok,ok, 'support')
> > > > > to chmod and friends:
> > > > >
> > > > > chmod -R a+R dir - sets r for files and rx for dirs
> > > >
> > > > X sets x for dirs, leaves files alone.
> > >
> > > Which sounds like exactly the behaviour the original poster wanted,
> > > AFAICS?
> >
> > Yes, that sounds like the behaviour I want. But X flag does not do that.
> > Sorry.
>
> Oh? I just checked, and X *does* set the x bit on directories only, leaving
> files unaffected. What's wrong with that? Does it not do this on your
> system? Or do you want some other behaviour?

I just checked it too (not olny read the manpage but conducted an
experiment). If a file has any of three x bits set, chmod a+X will
set all three x bits, making it world-executable.

That is not what I want. I want to make whole tree world-readable (and
browsable), i.e. a+r on files and a+rx on dirs. There is no chmod flag
which will do that.

[I'd like to take this silliness off the lkml but jas88@cam.ac.uk
rejects my direct emails:
----- Transcript of session follows -----
... while talking to navy.csi.cam.ac.uk.:
>>> RCPT To:<jas88@cam.ac.uk>
<<< 550 mail from 195.66.192.167 rejected: administrative prohibition (host
is blacklisted)
550 5.1.1 <jas88@cam.ac.uk>... User unknown ]
--
vda