On Mon, 15 Apr 2002 02:04:43 +0100 Will Newton <will [at] misconception.org.uk> wrote: > On Monday 15 Apr 2002 12:35 am, Chris J wrote: > > > Hmm...must see if Digital UNIX (strong BSD) and Solaris (strong SysV) > > do this (which means summat to look at at work tomoz [if I can find a > > Sun box to play on]). Certainly a new one, but then I've never seen a > > directory without execute :) I certainly don't recall ever seeing this > > behaviour documented anyware. > > I was under the impression that Solaris was more BSD than SysV. To the > extent that Sun is a Berkeley company, although it does have SysV > features I thought it was derived from SunOS which was almost the same > as BSD 4.3. SunOS was BSD, Solaris is completely SysV. To confuse things though Solaris is also known as SunOS 5.x, any version of SunOS over & including 5 is Solaris and hence SysV. > And unfortunately I also thought DEC UNIX was more of a SysV type of > thing. Dec UNIX (Tru64) is a bit of a crossbreed of BSD and SysV... it has got bits of both. http://www.osdata.com/oses/decunix.htm > BTW the x bit is equatable to "listable" when added to a directory. If a > user has no x bit they have no access to list a directory. Root can read > and write regardless of bits, and so can also list regardless of bits > also. Or am I missing the point? That's the standard unix behaviour. --Andrew -- sparc sun4c stuff : http://www.lostgeneration.freeserve.co.uk/sparc personal email : bob at lostgeneration dot freeserve dot co dot uk
Attachment:
pgp00013.pgp
Description: PGP signature