Gumby@MCC.COM (David Vinayak Wallace) (02/07/89)
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 89 08:41 EST
From: Jerry Roylance <glr@wheaties.ai.mit.edu>
Date: Sun, 5 Feb 89 21:55:20 EST
From: gumby@wheaties.ai.mit.edu (David Vinayak Wallace)
Is there any good reason /com/mailer/noneai and nanotech are
protected? I want to remove myself but can't.
No good reason. I think the protection gets altered when paranoid
people (those who set up their environment to prohibit group access by
default) edit the mailing list files.
Emacs, at least, should try to preserve the protection then when it
writes a later version of an existing file, rather than using umask.glr@WHEATIES.AI.MIT.EDU (Jerry Roylance) (02/08/89)
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 89 10:20 PST
From: David Vinayak Wallace <Gumby@mcc.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 89 08:41 EST
From: Jerry Roylance <glr@wheaties.ai.mit.edu>
Date: Sun, 5 Feb 89 21:55:20 EST
From: gumby@wheaties.ai.mit.edu (David Vinayak Wallace)
Is there any good reason /com/mailer/noneai and nanotech are
protected? I want to remove myself but can't.
No good reason. I think the protection gets altered when paranoid
people (those who set up their environment to prohibit group access by
default) edit the mailing list files.
Emacs, at least, should try to preserve the protection then when it
writes a later version of an existing file, rather than using umask.
Yes, Emacs and Zmacs don't alter the protection. The mechanism by which
these files get write protected is unexplained. We'll put some men on
it. Have your new neighbors arrived?
Jerry