From Kurt.Hornik@wu-wien.ac.at  Thu Mar 14 16:09:46 2002
From: Kurt.Hornik@wu-wien.ac.at (Kurt Hornik)
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 17:09:46 +0100
Subject: [Rd] File permissions test during R CMD check
In-Reply-To: <15503.35051.255583.275317@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
References: <15503.35051.255583.275317@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
Message-ID: <15504.52042.451614.174105@mithrandir.hornik.net>

>>>>> "David Kane writes:

> I think that I understand why R CMD check should warn if the
> permissions on a file are too restrictive, but I don't understand why
> it should warn if they are "too" loose. On UNIX, why is a file with
> 644 OK, but one with 664 (just adding group writability) problematic
> enough to require a warning?

I think we want the *installed* files to be 644 and dirs to be 755 (by
default).  Can we be sure that all routes to installing a package (as
source or binary) lead to this even if permissions originally were too
loose?  I don't, hence I prefer being on the defensive side.

-k
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
r-devel mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html
Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe"
(in the "body", not the subject !)  To: r-devel-request@stat.math.ethz.ch
_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._


[Rd] File permissions test during R CMD check
Kurt Hornik