touch-packages team mailing list archive

[Bib <1376443@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

More info: as umask is the ootb default (0002), it doesn't seem to be
the thing that a default cp would ignore, because actually cp ignores it
when an acl is involved. Instead, the culprit seems to be cp when cp
ignores an acl when present and uses its usual mode bits when it would
adopt the acl's ones in that situation. I still don't understand why
many speak about mask or cp --preserve

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to acl in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1376443

Title:
  Default ACL not inherited as Access ACL on copy and move

Status in “acl” package in Ubuntu:
  New

Bug description:
  Ubuntu Desktop 14.04 fresh default installation
  Default ACL and gid are set OK on parent folder (/srv/parent). (ext4)
  mkdir child /srv/parent
  and
  touch /srv/parent/file /srv/parent/child/file
  OK Both /srv/parent/file, /srv/parent/child/,  /srv/parent/child/file show correct same acl as /srv/parent (getfacl)

  cp -r /media/<user>/<label>/SomeTree ends in corrupted ACL where Access ACL mask::--- instead of rwx, resulting in acl set for named users and groups are ineffective. KO
  Although, default:mask::rwx is ok.

  For regular (i.e. non dir) files in the copied SomeTree,  Access ACL
  mask::r-- instead of rwx, resulting in only r out of the set
  permissions for named users and groups will survive. KO

  setfacl --set or -m reports no error

  Workaround : grant permissions to users that would not have them, eg.
  o+rX or adduser reader writersgroup

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/acl/+bug/1376443/+subscriptions