<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<br>
On 11/15/11 11:58 AM, Bill Bogstad wrote:
<blockquote class=" cite"
id="mid_CAJFsZ=pkJ_U=YYRy-kxG752qNCCU1aee2aR1XO9q9LmSCEvRnw_mail_gmail_com"
cite="mid:CAJFsZ=pkJ_U=YYRy-kxG752qNCCU1aee2aR1XO9q9LmSCEvRnw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<blockquote class=" cite" id="Cite_21" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">What is the expected result of doing a `chmod u+s /path/to/dir`? I assume that, as the SGID bit ensures the group ownership is inherited, you'd expect files created in a SUID to inherit the user ownership of the directory?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">I wouldn't expect it to do anything. I can't find the POSIX
documentation on this right now, but wikipedia says that the SUID bit
is ignored on directories for UNIX/Linux. Perhaps we misunderstood
each other. I only meant that SGID would force the group ownership of
a new file to be the same as the parent directory. Looking back at my
previous email, I can see that I wasn't clear enough.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
OK, if u+s doesn't do anything I can probably live with that. I'd
have to think about it -- I am more in the "power user" rather than
"sys admin" category, so +s and +t are not things I use much at
all. Sticky group ownership is good, though.<br>
<br>
Anyway, thanks for these ideas! I'm off to play with them now.<br>
<br>
Ian<br>
</body>
</html>