bzr and ntfsmount (fuse) issues?

[John Arbash Meinel]

Matthew Hannigan wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 01:26:32PM -0400, Aaron Bentley wrote:
>>> It seems to complicate things a lot to have to
>>> start doing mount-point detection.
>>>
>>> It is Fuse which is setting EPERM when we try to call os.chmod(). Since
>>> it doesn't permit chmod() on an ntfs mount.
>> It's always been a bit bogus to assume that chmod is supported on all
>> unix filesystems.
> 
> Indeed
> 
>>  We should be testing on a per-path basis, I think.
> 
> 
> It sorta points to the inappropriateness of preserving
> perms in a VCS.
> 
> If it must be done, perhaps it should be done as a clearly
> separate final step, the failure of which would only
> be a warning (by default), not a failure.
> 
> 
> Matt

Actually the main permissions that we are interested in preserving are
in the .bzr/ directory.
Because if someone uses 'chmod 2775/664' to enable a group shared
repository, we would like to keep it so that new entries are also group
writable.
It turns out that the openssh implementation of sftp screws us because
it strips the group sticky bit if we want to chmod to enable the group
write bit.

John
=:->

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 254 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20060807/89602042/attachment.pgp