Re: [PATCH] tar-tree: add the "tar.applyUmask" config option

From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
Date: Jul 19, 2006, 22:50 UTC
Message-ID: <20060719225021.GA28591@1wt.eu>
In-Reply-To: <7vd5c1jkc3.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>

On Wed, Jul 19, 2006 at 03:33:48PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 17 quoted lines

> Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> writes:
> 
> > While I agreed with Linus that the very permissive file modes set in tar
> > archives were not particularly a problem for kernel users, I'm finding
> > that for some other projects it sometimes becomes really annoying, to
> > the point that I finally considered using a plain tar instead. This is a
> > shame because tar-tree is really fast an powerful, and I like its ability
> > to enforce permissions when those of the local dir might be wrong for
> > various reasons.
> 
> I do not have problem with an option to allow a non-default
> behaviour in this area.  Maybe we might want to be able to set
> the mask in the configuration file as well, perhaps like...
> 
> 	tar.umask = user ;# use from the current process'
>         tar.umask = 0    ;# same as default
>         tar.umask = 002  ;# group friendly

This is an excellent idea. I will try to find some spare time tomorrow to implement it. I've also seen the proposal about the --umask= option. I don't think it's absolutely necessary since the umask has little reason to change during the repo's life, but if the implementation is obvious, I will do it too.

Thanks for your suggestion, Willy