| To: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] xfstests: Fix some file permission. |
| From: | Alex Elder <aelder@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 12 Oct 2010 15:13:51 -0500 |
| Cc: | Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, Alain Renaud <arenaud@xxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <20101010080502.GA6674@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <4CAE483F.1020608@xxxxxxx> <1286660111.5392.6.camel@doink> <20101010015723.GM4681@dastard> <20101010080502.GA6674@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Reply-to: | aelder@xxxxxxx |
On Sun, 2010-10-10 at 04:05 -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 12:57:23PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > This looks good to me but I'd like a second opinion,
> > > to make sure there's no reason any of these should
> > > be non-executable.
> >
> > I don't think it matters. Consistency is good, though, and we've
> > taken patches like this in the past.
>
> Yeah. Btw, I'm not sure git-am can apply the mode changes from a patch,
> in the worst case you might have to do the chmod calls manually.
>
Just a follow-up... "git am" *does* do the right thing with
a git-generated patch that describes changes to modes only.
(But "patch" and "quilt" of course just think it's garbage.)
I've committed this change to the xfstests-dev tree on kernel.org
and will push it out to oss next time I update that tree (most
likely later this week).
-Alex
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: ENOSPC at 90% with plenty of inodes, Jan Derfinak |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | [PATCH 0/2] xfsrestore: lift directory entry count limitations, wkendall |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] xfstests: Fix some file permission., Alex Elder |
| Next by Thread: | Re: fallocate() on XFS clobbers S*ID-bits, Dave Chinner |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |