Re: UPG and the default umask
Am Dienstag 18 Mai 2010, 12:49:08 schrieb Christoph Anton Mitterer:
> > If you are not allowed to use ACLs
>
> That's no reason for UPGs to exist, is it?
> All important filesystems support ACLs, right? All kernels in Debian and
> do so, right? So technically, no problem.
> So being "not allowed" probably means organisational issues, right? But
> then talk to your admins.
>
> What's done here is to abuse a system just to workaround something else
> ("don't have/want to ACLs), right?
Do e.g. backup system deal well with ACLs? The standard tar doesn't, except
when you script around it... or if you use star.
HS
Reply to: