gnc-backend-file.c: ERR_BACKEND_PERM too unspecific

[Tim Wunder]

I don't see where Christian is talking about chmoding a backup file here. I 
read this as him getting a warning when saving the data file. A warning that 
caused the app to fail, and really wasn't the warning it thought it was (the 
file was saved regardless of the warning). Regardless, an app should not try 
to chmod *any* pre-existing data file. Sys admins assign file permissions for 
a reason. Apps shouldn't attempt to change that willy-nilly...

Of course, I reserve the right to have misread what he wrote ;)

Tim

On Monday 28 November 2005 6:48 pm, someone claiming to be Derek Atkins wrote:
> I'm wondering why we even try to chown the old backup file at all?
> I can understand why we want to chmod the NEW data file, but I
> don't understand why we'd want to do anything but "rename" the
> old backup file?
>
> -derek
>
> Christian Stimming <stimming at tuhh.de> writes:
> > I just recently got a new error message from the gnucash-HEAD that didn't
> > show up with 1.8. Here's the deal: I have two linux users accessing the
> > gnucash file alternating. The directory of that file has 775 permissions
> > and both of them are in the same group, so both are able to write the
> > file in that directory.  However, on file saving in 1.8 I always got the
> > PWARN message on the cmdline saying that the new user is "unable to chown
> > filename", which was quite understandable because the new user cannot
> > chown the previous file that was written by the old user. In 1.8 this was
> > a not-too-noisy warning on the cmdline.
> >
> > However, with SVN-HEAD on "save file" this "unable to chown filename"
> > warning in  src/backend/file/gnc-backend-file.c:556 results in a
> > ERR_BACKEND_PERM error code being passed to gnucash, which will then show
> > a big red error window saying "You do not have permission to access 
> > %s\n"! Uh oh! Very frightening.
> >
> > As it turns out, the file saving went just fine. Only the old backup file
> > couldn't be chown'd to the new user, because it is still being owned by
> > that other user.
> >
> > Conclusion: This ERR_BACKEND_PERM either needs to be removed from these
> > two particular warnings, or these particular warnings need to have (new,
> > additional) error codes. That ERR_BACKEND_PERM error message is really
> > meant for the case when the actual data file cannot be accessed because
> > of permissions, isn't it? This user feedback needs to be crystal clear in
> > such respect. Any ideas?
> >
> > Christian
> > _______________________________________________
> > gnucash-devel mailing list
> > gnucash-devel at gnucash.org
> > https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel

-- 
Fedora Core release 4 (Stentz), Linux 2.6.14-1.1637_FC4
KDE: 3.4.3-1.1.fc4.kde, xorg-x11-6.8.2-37.FC4.49.2
 19:30:06 up 8 days, 11:48,  4 users,  load average: 1.58, 1.32, 0.67
MP3/OGG archive Total playlength : 7 days, 10 hours, 31 mins 30 seconds
"It's what you learn after you know it all that counts" John Wooden
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.gnucash.org/pipermail/gnucash-devel/attachments/20051128/f747cce5/attachment.bin