I'd take a quess that the file is on a qtree (or volume) with NTFS security. This is expected behaviour in that situation.
-----Original Message----- From: owner-dl-toasters@netapp.com [mailto:owner-dl-toasters@netapp.com]On Behalf Of bhaskar.g@philips.com Sent: 08 March 2000 04:01 To: toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Problem in ownerships
Hi all,
Recently we have procured a Filer 720. We are facing a strange problem. Though I am the owner of a file or directory When i try to change the ownership of the file or directory or if i try to copy the file to some other directory. It gives the following errors
bhaskarg@sahadev$ chown babuk:users quota.txt quota.txt: Not owner bhaskarg@sahadev$ ll quota.txt -rw-rw-r-- 1 bhaskarg users 1137 Feb 29 10:29 quota.txt bhaskarg@sahadev$
sunitha@detroit$ ll total 336 -rwxrwxr-x 1 sunitha WEB 1936 Jan 28 10:17 Glite_To_do27thJan.html -rwxrwxr-x 1 sunitha WEB 5945 Feb 11 16:49 Glite_to10Feb.html -rwxrwxr-x 1 sunitha WEB 20992 Mar 1 11:51 Glite_to24thFeb.xls -rwxrwxr-x 1 sunitha WEB 30068 Feb 28 17:48 estimation_back.html drwxrwxr-x 2 sunitha WEB 4096 Mar 7 14:42 images -rwxrwxr-x 1 sunitha WEB 690 Mar 2 16:52 index.html -rwxrwxr-x 1 sunitha WEB 418 Feb 5 16:03 innovteam.html -rwxrwxr-x 1 sunitha WEB 2466 Mar 7 14:45 right_innov.html sunitha@detroit$ cp -p right_innov.html /home/www/htdocs/groups/innov/. cp: utime failed right_innov.html: Not owner sunitha@detroit$
regards Bhaskar G Systems Engineer, Philips Semiconductors, #3, Sterling Square,Madras Bank Road, Off St Mark's Road,BANGALORE-560 001. Voice : +91 80 222 9200 Ext 5060 Fax: +91 80 2229700
----- Original Message ----- From: Bond, Andrew abond@netapp.com To: bhaskar.g@philips.com; toasters@mathworks.com Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2000 3:42 AM Subject: RE: Problem in ownerships
I'd take a quess that the file is on a qtree (or volume) with NTFS
security.
This is expected behaviour in that situation.
Good point. I would have expected a different error message (EACCES rather than EPERM), but it appears that chown(2) and utimes(2) may interpret those very strictly, and assume that EPERM must mean that you are not the owner if you're not root, rather than simply being denied write access. They don't seem to consider the possibility of being denied write access even when the times argument is non-NULL.
Still, wouldn't it be more appropriate for the filer to return NFS[3]ERR_ACCES instead of NFS[3]ERR_PERM in those situations?
Bruce