Message10918

Author	jeff.allen
Recipients	jeff.allen, pekka.klarck, zyasoft
Date	2016-08-27.17:38:56
SpamBayes Score	-1.0
Marked as misclassified	Yes
Message-id	<1472319536.94.0.717702148603.issue2314@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to

Content
My observation of #2314 is that setReadonly() reports failure when the target is a directory. It seems this is because the simple DOS read-only flag on a directory doesn't mean what Java means by read-only, it means "don't delete me". So making a directory read-only in the Java sense cannot succeed. See: http://bugs.java.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6728842 I think is at least a contributory factor in #2474 as Pekka suggests. A proper solution involves ACLs. For now, ignoring the read-only for directories seems most consistent. And it makes the regression test pass.

My observation of #2314 is that setReadonly() reports failure when the target is a directory. It seems this is because the simple DOS read-only flag on a directory doesn't mean what Java means by read-only, it means "don't delete me". So making a directory read-only in the Java sense cannot succeed. See:

http://bugs.java.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6728842

I think is at least a contributory factor in #2474 as Pekka suggests.

A proper solution involves ACLs. For now, ignoring the read-only for directories seems most consistent. And it makes the regression test pass.

History
Date	User	Action	Args
2016-08-27 17:38:56	jeff.allen	set	messageid: <1472319536.94.0.717702148603.issue2314@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2016-08-27 17:38:56	jeff.allen	set	recipients: + jeff.allen, pekka.klarck, zyasoft
2016-08-27 17:38:56	jeff.allen	link	issue2314 messages
2016-08-27 17:38:56	jeff.allen	create