I have a directory that has a default ACL of g+rwx set up. If I
Why did the group mask of
Also, executing the same commands on Debian doesn't have the same effect. In particular, the mask in Debian becomes
touch
a file inside that directory, I would've expected it would retain the rw
permissions, but it seems it doesn't. An example explains:
Bash:
$ ./test_acl.sh
+ mkdir storage
+ setfacl -d -m u::rwx,g::rwx,o::-,m::rwx storage
+ touch outside
+ cd storage
+ touch inside
+ cd ..
+ ls -ld outside storage storage/inside
-rw-r--r-- 1 aaa aaa 0 Dec 28 03:16 outside
drwxr-xr-x 2 aaa aaa 512 Dec 28 03:16 storage
-rw-r-----+ 1 aaa aaa 0 Dec 28 03:16 storage/inside
+ getfacl -d storage
# file: storage
# owner: aaa
# group: aaa
user::rwx
group::rwx
mask::rwx
other::---
+ getfacl storage
# file: storage
# owner: aaa
# group: aaa
user::rwx
group::r-x
other::r-x
+ getfacl outside
# file: outside
# owner: aaa
# group: aaa
user::rw-
group::r--
other::r--
+ getfacl storage/inside
# file: storage/inside
# owner: aaa
# group: aaa
user::rw-
group::rwx # effective: r--
mask::r--
other::---
+ umask
0022
Why did the group mask of
storage/inside
change from rwx
to r--
?Also, executing the same commands on Debian doesn't have the same effect. In particular, the mask in Debian becomes
rw-
. Is one right and the other wrong? Or just different behaviour? Is there some sort of standard governing this?