Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from January 2009
On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 11:11:08PM -0500, Charles Bailey wrote: > > - Moves the permission-changing code to File::Copy::cp(), making it > non-identical to File::Copy::copy(). I think this is a decent > compromise, retaining backwards compatibility in the "primary" > routine, while allowing people who chose cp() to get more POSIXy > semantics. It does break backwards compatibility of cp() wrt > permissions. I can find a handful of examples in CPAN, for which I > hope smokers will give some feedback. As for the DARKpan, who knows . > . . I think that's indeed a useful compromise. > It DOESN'T do the following: > > - Test the handling of setid bits. Doing this properly would required > chown, and hence root, which doesn't strike me as belonging in the > regular test suite. It looks like we don't test chown itself in this > way, so I figured adding skip-unless-I'm-root tests was overkill. I fail to see why one needs chown to test setid bits. I think this can be tested without needed extra priviledges, and I've some ideas on how to test this. I'll come with a patch in the next few days. AbigailThread Previous | Thread Next