Re: odd chown difference between 2.0 and 2.1pre kernels
Gregory Maxwell (linker@z.ml.org)
Tue, 12 Jan 1999 10:33:11 -0500 (EST)
On Mon, 11 Jan 1999, System Administrator wrote:
> Forgive my stupidity, but under 2.0.x i always considered the setuid loss
> on chown a flaw. I, personally, feel it should keep the setuid bit. If
> you're chowning something YOU own, setuid'd to you, why take the bit off??
> Am I missing something trivial here?
All togeather too often, sysadms will chown a mess of users files to root
to prevent the user from playing with them.. opps.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/