Author: Simon Matter <simon.matter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2001 14:44:57 +0200
from mobile.sauter-bc.com (unknown [10.1.6.21]) by basel1.sauter-bc.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FDB357306 for <linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 14:44:57 +0200 (CEST) Organization: Sauter AG,
Which files, for example? So this does NOT happen with either stock Red Hat or XFS 1.0? Not sure what might be causing this... -Eric -- Eric Sandeen XFS for Linux http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs sand
Almost certainly the kernel bug introduced somewhere around 2.4.3 and fixed in 2.4.7. The default umask for kernel threads, including init was incorrectly set to 000. Stock RedHat init scripts have u
Author: Simon Matter <simon.matter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2001 16:17:47 +0200
from mobile.sauter-bc.com (unknown [10.1.6.21]) by basel1.sauter-bc.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D647757306; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 16:17:47 +0200 (CEST) Cc: linux-xfs <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx> Organization:
Author: Simon Matter <simon.matter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2001 16:39:50 +0200
from mobile.sauter-bc.com (unknown [10.1.6.21]) by basel1.sauter-bc.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3961157306; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 16:39:51 +0200 (CEST) Cc: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>, linux-xfs <linux
The interesting thing is that the initscripts should stay the same, so I would suspect something running in the kernel at install time is at fault. The 1.0.1 install package does not have a redhat e
Ah, hindsight is great, isn't it? :( The Red Hat 2.4.3 + XFS kernel is running at install time, so I guess that's where this problem comes from. Hm, might be time to come up with a script to fix this
You list of files indicates that the house is probably still locked, but once you're in the house, some of the rooms that should be locked, aren't. That doesn't make it any less of an unpleasant surp
Author: Simon Matter <simon.matter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2001 17:31:10 +0200
from mobile.sauter-bc.com (unknown [10.1.6.21]) by basel1.sauter-bc.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E077F57306; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 17:31:10 +0200 (CEST) Cc: Steve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>, Keith Owens <kaos@xxx
The Alpha installer uses the RedHat Alpha 2.4.3 RPM + XFS patches but doesn't suffer from the problem. Do you have the anaconda-7.1-umask patch in the IA32 installer? -- Martin K. Petersen Cereal Bo
Hm, where might one find this patch? Also, FWIW, this isn't an xfs-specific problem, I just did an ext2 install with the 1.0.1 CD, and it's still there. So I guess it is the kernel bug previously men
In your mail. In general the bits in the Alpha packages are slightly more recent than in the IA32 versions. -- Martin K. Petersen Cereal Bowl Engineer, Linuxcare, Inc. http://mkp.net/ SGI XFS, Linux
Which files, for example? So this does NOT happen with either stock Red Hat or XFS 1.0? Not sure what might be causing this... Sorry for not providing more information. It does NOT happen with XFS 1.
installer, too, I suppose. If you're doing so, could you please include my modified RPM's: My previous mail: http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/mail_archive/0107/msg01211.html RPM's: http://home.datacom
Author: Simon Matter <Simon.Matter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2001 19:10:50 +0200
from mobile.sauter-bc.com (unknown [10.1.6.21]) by basel1.sauter-bc.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA77657306; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 19:10:20 +0200 (CEST) Cc: linux-xfs <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx> References: <3
Author: Simon Matter <Simon.Matter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2001 19:13:25 +0200
from mobile.sauter-bc.com (unknown [10.1.6.21]) by basel1.sauter-bc.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2145357306; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 19:12:54 +0200 (CEST) Cc: linux-xfs <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx> References: <2
At 7:10 PM +0200 8/2/01, Simon Matter wrote: Unfortunately the problem applies to all directories, but for example in /usr there are just a few files with wrong permissions because usually the proble
Does an `rpm --setperms -a` fix most of the wrong permissions? -- Nate Straz nstraz@xxxxxxx sgi, inc http://www.sgi.com/ Linux Test Project http://ltp.sf.net/