rsync - Mar 2020 - Would you expect --perms -M--fake-super to set the file mode to the original one?

Thanks. This is a bit counter-intuitive to me. So how would you tell
rsync to store the original permissions in the xattr, but do not touch
the real file mode?

On Thursday, March 12, 2020 6:26:18 PM CET, Kevin Korb via rsync
wrote:
> I would expect that the sending rsync would only send the perms provided
> modified by the --chmod.  I wouldn't expect the receiver to even know
> the other permissions.
>
> On 3/12/20 1:23 PM, Dimitrios Apostolou via rsync wrote:
>> Thank you for the feedback, I'm glad to see that different people
see
>> the issue
>> differently. As a followup question, what would you expect this to do:
>> 
>> rsync --perms --chmod g+rX -M--fake-super src dst
>> 
>> I would expect it to store the original permissions in the 
>> xattr, while ...
>

I don't believe it is possible.  I think the misunderstanding stems from
the fact that the permissions are even stored in the xattr.  They don't
need to be there but they may as well be.  They don't take much space.
The real question would be when rsync reads the file to restore it and
the file perms are different than the ones in the xattr which set does
it use?

On 3/16/20 10:01 AM, Dimitrios Apostolou via rsync
wrote:
> Thanks. This is a bit counter-intuitive to me. So how would you tell
> rsync to store the original permissions in the xattr, but do not touch
> the real file mode?
> 
> On Thursday, March 12, 2020 6:26:18 PM CET, Kevin Korb via rsync wrote:
>> I would expect that the sending rsync would only send the perms
provided
>> modified by the --chmod.? I wouldn't expect the receiver to even
know
>> the other permissions.
>>
>> On 3/12/20 1:23 PM, Dimitrios Apostolou via rsync wrote:
>>> Thank you for the feedback, I'm glad to see that different
people see
>>> the issue
>>> differently. As a followup question, what would you expect this to
do:
>>>
>>> rsync --perms --chmod g+rX -M--fake-super src dst
>>>
>>> I would expect it to store the original permissions in the xattr,
>>> while ...
>>
> 
> 
-- 
~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,
	Kevin Korb			Phone:    (407) 252-6853
	Systems Administrator		Internet:
	FutureQuest, Inc.		Kevin at FutureQuest.net  (work)
	Orlando, Florida		kmk at sanitarium.net (personal)
	Web page:			https://sanitarium.net/
	PGP public key available on web site.
~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL:
<http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/rsync/attachments/20200316/199654db/signature.sig>

According to --help:

  --fake-super            store/recover privileged attrs using xattrs

So I would assume which mode it uses when it reads the file,
depends on whether this option is on or off.


On Monday, March 16, 2020 9:09:36 PM CET, Kevin Korb via rsync
wrote:
> I don't believe it is possible.  I think the misunderstanding stems
from
> the fact that the permissions are even stored in the xattr.  They don't
> need to be there but they may as well be.  They don't take much space.
> The real question would be when rsync reads the file to restore it and
> the file perms are different than the ones in the xattr which set does
> it use?
>
> On 3/16/20 10:01 AM, Dimitrios Apostolou via rsync wrote:
>> Thanks. This is a bit counter-intuitive to me. So how would you tell
>> rsync to store the original permissions in the xattr, but do not touch
>> the real file mode?
>> 
>> On Thursday, March 12, 2020 6:26:18 PM CET, Kevin Korb via 
>> rsync wrote: ...
>