[Slackbuilds-users] Call for Bug Fixes, Patches, etc

[Andrzej Telszewski]

On 24/02/16 16:14, Erik Hanson wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Feb 2016 08:22:43 +0100
> Andrzej Telszewski <atelszewski at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 24/02/16 07:37, Kyle Guinn wrote:
>>> On 2/23/16, Andrzej Telszewski <atelszewski at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 05/02/16 13:48, Martijn Dekker wrote:
>>>>> 2. The following horrible, broken and obsolete eyesore:
>>>>>
>>>>> find -L . \
>>>>>     \( -perm 777 -o -perm 775 -o -perm 750 -o -perm 711 -o -perm
>>>>> 555 \ -o -perm 511 \) -exec chmod 755 {} \; -o \
>>>>>     \( -perm 666 -o -perm 664 -o -perm 640 -o -perm 600 -o -perm
>>>>> 444 \ -o -perm 440 -o -perm 400 \) -exec chmod 644 {} \;
>>>>>
>>>>> can be replaced by:
>>>>>
>>>>>       chmod -R a-st,u+rwX,go-w+rX .
>>>>
>>>> I advocate this solution.
>>>> Can we switch for it?
>>>> Or at least would the SlackBuild be accepted if I used this
>>>> construct?
>>>
>>> Even shorter and simpler to understand:
>>> chmod -R u+w,go-w,a+rX-st .
>>>
>>
>> Yep, even nicer ;)
>
> These 'hammer everything' solutions change permissions on files that
> the find command specifically misses, which may have been set on purpose
> by upstream.
>

Can you elaborate?

> Note that I'm not adverse to submissions using a single chmod line,
> many of my scripts did this in the past. It requires an extra level
> of awareness though, that might be a trap for new players. For the
> template, we should leave the find command in place. Bulk swapping
> them out in the repo is not an option.
>
>

Depends on who you ask;) For me it's the "find magic" that always has 
been something I've never even tried to understand;) On the other side, 
chmod approach is crystal clear.

-- 
Best regards,
Andrzej Telszewski