|
Boost : |
From: Tarjei Knapstad (tarjei.knapstad_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-11-01 12:07:45
On Mon, 2004-11-01 at 16:04, Aleksey Gurtovoy wrote:
> Vladimir Prus writes:
> > Aleksey Gurtovoy wrote:
> >
> > >> The first two archives does not give write permissions to the user (for
> > >> the unarchived files).
> > >
> > > That's intentional. After all, normally you shouldn't be modifying
> > > anything in the distribution. Or should you?
> >
> > No unix source package I ever downloaded had read-only files.
>
> Could our long-time unix users confirm/negate this experience?
>
Confirmed.
> > That gives no protection, really.
>
> It prevents you from accidental editing/deletion.
>
But that's putting the protection in at the wrong level in unix-land.
For a system install, the files would be installed to a system wide
location by the root user and thus only be writable by root. If I'd like
to download boost and put it somewhere in my $HOME, I expect to be able
to do whatever I like to the files. I.e. experiment with the code (this
would not affect other users).
> > If I unintentionally remove some files, I can just reinstall.
>
> I'd rather be saved from that.
>
You are if you install boost as root (as you should if you're installing
it system wide on any unix installation).
Access control is more fine grained on unix - read only is only
applicable as a "security measure" on windows IMHO.
Cheers,
-- Tarjei
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk