| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_upgrade permission check |
| Date: | 2011-05-16 16:32:56 |
| Message-ID: | 201105161632.p4GGWuJ07536@momjian.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> "full access permissions" seems unhelpfully vague. Why not say
> >> "you must have both read and write access to the current directory"?
>
> > OK, I can do that, but they need execute permission in that directory
> > too to look up file names in there. Should I say execute too?
>
> I doubt it's worth worrying about. man chdir saith
>
> In order for a directory to become the current directory, a process must
> have execute (search) access to the directory.
>
> I'm not entirely certain what happens if you chdir into a directory and
> then someone revokes the bit afterwards, but I do not feel a need to
> complicate the error message to cover such a case.
OK, fixed the the attached applied patch.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| /rtmp/pg_upgrade | text/x-diff | 525 bytes |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alex Hunsaker | 2011-05-16 19:13:39 | Re: Fix for Perl 5.14 |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2011-05-16 16:10:35 | Re: pg_upgrade permission check |