FW: patch for safer/saner permissions setting

[David Collier-Brown]

Jeremy Allison wrote:
> I also think the idea of retaining the extended security
> (setuid, sticky etc.) bits is a good one, but I'm not sure
> how to rationalize this with the current behaviour which
> prevents any Samba created file from containing any
> of these bits unless set in the "force mask".

	Logically, I can argue that the special bits
	should be honored/retained by Samba if the
	ordinary create mask allows them, and forced
	into place if the force masks sets them.

	That's sufficient, and probably necessary
	(in the adademics' sense of "necessary").


--dave
-- 
David Collier-Brown,  | Always do right. This will gratify some people
185 Ellerslie Ave.,   | and astonish the rest.        -- Mark Twain
Willowdale, Ontario   | http://java.science.yorku.ca/~davecb
Work: (905) 477-0437 Home: (416) 223-8968 Email: davecb at canada.sun.com