From xemacs-m  Sun Jul 13 01:28:50 1997
Received: from altair.xemacs.org (steve@xemacs.miranova.com [206.190.83.19])
	by xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id BAA10046
	for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Sun, 13 Jul 1997 01:28:50 -0500 (CDT)
Received: (from steve@localhost)
	by altair.xemacs.org (8.8.6/8.8.6) id XAA14204;
	Sat, 12 Jul 1997 23:31:39 -0700
Mail-Copies-To: never
To: xemacs-beta@xemacs.org
Subject: Re: chmod o-r clears sgid bit on directory?
References: <87g1tjpmeh.fsf@bittersweet.inetarena.com>
X-Url: http://www.miranova.com/%7Esteve/
X-Face: `'%\i;ySOu]g?NlziJSk_$&@]KP`}~PEQPjZ5;nxSaDW_o$4+4%Ab]%Ifw3ZR;7TIT3,O,'
 @2{L;]ox6kc;$_5kU'n**9vFg-]eV~GbxSVCx|(s%uR[],*:^WKmC`B}(;|k9/m]gwt?&`t;^rfCJg
 khHH>pP1W\)xM0U@!FNDD72{3fDP$PkBhx^7Z?-WxH6DbFN:QOnT`llzW}VGdYv;n9lzljQvKTIBhQ
 YuV
X-Attribution: sb
From: Steven L Baur <steve@xemacs.org>
In-Reply-To: karlheg+debian@inetarena.com's message of "12 Jul 1997 22:10:46 -0700"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.108)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Date: 12 Jul 1997 23:31:38 -0700
Message-ID: <m2vi2f8nud.fsf@altair.xemacs.org>
Lines: 31
X-Mailer: Gnus v5.4.63/XEmacs 20.3(beta13) - "Brussels"

Karl M Hegbloom <karlheg+debian@inetarena.com> writes:

>  I was just useing XEmacs dired mode, in an xterm tty, as a pseudo
> user who owns a smartlist mailing list.

What do you mean by `psuedo user'?

> The "/var/list/universe" directory was:

> drwxrwsr-x slarti list  /var/list/universe

> ... and I typed '-' with the cursor over the r for "others", in an
> attempt to make the permissions be:

> drwxrws--- slarti list /var/list/universe

> ... and the sgid bit[1] on the directory got cleared.  Is that a bug or a
> feature?  Is clearing that read bit supposed to clear the sgid bit?

It's probably a bug somewhere.  I tried it on a directory with
permissions as you wrote above and hit `-' over both the others r and
x and it left the directory with permissions:

drwxrws---   2 steve    devel        1024 Jul 12 23:25 /tmp/karl/

> Debian GNU 1.3  Linux 2.1.36 AMD K5 PR-133
                        ^^^^^^

Does it behave the same way on Linux 2.0?  I recall seeing bug reports 
about permissions being fouled up in various incarnations of the beta
test Linux kernel.

