am I missing something, or are permissions always preserved?

[jw schultz]

On Mon, Jan 20, 2003 at 07:00:55PM -0600, Dave Dykstra wrote:
> I submitted a change to ignore errors from chmod when -p is not set.
> GNU cp does the same thing.
> 
> - Dave Dykstra

Fair enough.  It is an isane condition except for filesystem
semantics mismatch.

> On Mon, Jan 13, 2003 at 01:13:48PM -0800, jw schultz wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 13, 2003 at 02:38:29PM -0600, Dave Dykstra wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jan 13, 2003 at 11:00:58AM -0800, Ben wrote:
> > > > As a rule of thumb, I think silent errors a very bad idea. It means
> > > > things might not be behaving like you expect, but you have no idea. In
> > > > general, rsync's current behavior is correct. In my case niche case, it
> > > > doesn't work. I think the proper solution is to change rsync's behavior,
> > > > not reduce the errors it produces.
> > > 
> > > Maybe it wouldn't be so bad if it only looked for certain error codes from
> > > the failed chmod.  The nice thing about ignoring errors is that it's one
> > > less thing for users to have to learn and understand.
> > > 
> > > Any other opinions?
> > 
> > First, identify the errno.  Is it the same for cygwin and
> > samba mounts?  Then do the treatment for that errno(s) only.
> > 
> > As far as i can tell except where the filesystem doesn't
> > support chmod an error chmoding here is insane.  We just
> > created the file.
> > 
> > I'd rather kick out a warning on the first one and then
> > ignore.  That warns the user that something isn't quite
> > right without flooding the log.
> > 
> > Dave, see my post a litter earlier in the thread for a
> > possible code change.

-- 
________________________________________________________________
	J.W. Schultz            Pegasystems Technologies
	email address:		jw at pegasys.ws

		Remember Cernan and Schmitt