*BSD News Article 20622


Return to BSD News archive

Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!darwin.sura.net!haven.umd.edu!umd5.umd.edu!roissy.umd.edu!mark
From: mark@roissy.umd.edu (Mark Sienkiewicz)
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.bugs
Subject: Re: bug with ufs file creation
Date: 8 Sep 1993 17:52:34 GMT
Organization: University of Maryland
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <26l652$mp5@umd5.umd.edu>
References: <CCzu78.DJD@kithrup.com> <328@rook.ukc.ac.uk> <CD0AnI.1rM@taronga.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: roissy.umd.edu

In article <CD0AnI.1rM@taronga.com> peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
>
>That doesn't make sense. I can see using the directory group to choose
>which of *your* groups the file should be in, but what's the point of
>creating a file in a group you're not a member of by default?

You might claim that it should be

	if user is in the group the directory belongs to
		created files inherit the group on the director
	else
		created files belong to the users primary group

I've used machines that do this.  It seems reasonable.

>I suppose this is all part of the broken BSD chown semantics, inherited
>from the days of the Berkeley Fascist File System (not a dig... that's
>what it was called) with only group masters able to chown files owned by
>members of a group.

Ordinary users can't *chown* files.  They can *chgrp* their own files
to other groups that they are members of.

>I think that this whole area: groups, chown, quotas, and so on needs to
>be reconsidered. It's become a big mess.

In what way is it a mess?