Thu, 06 Nov 2008 18:41:13 +0000
Herbert Poetzl wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 04, 2008 at 07:01:45PM +0000, Ed W wrote:
>
>> Daniel Hokka Zakrisson wrote:
>>
>>> Content, and basic properties. Hashifying a file owned by root and one
>>> owned by a user would be rather bad...
>>>
>
..
> well, it would just be wrong, because the user
> would not want to have his/her file owned by root
> and probably root wouldn't want to have the file
> owned by some (maybe not even local) user :)
>
OK, so the ownership info is a function of the file itself and not the
link? That would explain the problem and also why the link check is as
it is
Thanks
Ed W
Herbert Poetzl wrote:
On Tue, Nov 04, 2008 at 07:01:45PM +0000, Ed W wrote:
Daniel Hokka Zakrisson wrote:
Content, and basic properties. Hashifying a file owned by root and one
owned by a user would be rather bad...
..
well, it would just be wrong, because the user
would not want to have his/her file owned by root
and probably root wouldn't want to have the file
owned by some (maybe not even local) user :)
OK, so the ownership info is a function of the file itself and not the
link? That would explain the problem and also why the link check is as
it is
Thanks
Ed W