Ed Wilts wrote:
> Use the dir_umask option to set directory umasks.
Thanks to Ed, and also to Stetson Webster, Darren Dunham and Ned Harvey
for your replies.
Cheers,
-r
Roy McMorran wrote:
> I have a qtree that's shared among NFS and CIFS clients. The security
> style is Unix.
>
> If I set the umask to be 002, ie:
>
> filer> cifs shares -change myshare -umask 2
>
> Then the files created in the share via CIFS still have the *execute
> bits set*:
>
> $ ls -al test.txt
> -rwxrwxr-x 1 user group 4 May 19 16:41 test.txt
>
> That's not what I want; none of these files should really be executable.
>
> I have read at least one thread in the list archives that suggest
> using a umask of 113, ie:
>
> filer> cifs shares -change myshare -umask 113
>
> This seems sketchy, but I gave it a try. Well, it works for files,
> but also omits the execute bits from newly-created *directories*:
>
> $ ls -ald test*
> -rwxrwxr-x 1 user group 4 May 19 16:41 test.txt
> -rw-rw-r-- 1 user group 4 May 19 16:43 test2.txt
> drw-rw-r-- 2 user group 4096 May 19 16:48 test
>
> And directories don't work so well in that case!
>
> Am I missing something? Why should it not behave like the Unix umask
> command (with respect to directories)?
>
> OnTap 7.2.5 if it matters.
>
> Thanks,
>
--
Roy McMorran
Systems Administrator
MDI Biological Laboratory
mcmorran@...
