RE: why doesnt the include file install set the file permisions to unwritable?

["Jeff Hill" <johill@lanl.gov>]

Hi Maren,

> so that the next person can overwrite it?
> We generally have more than one person working on things, at
> least over the years.

The issue is that the source file, maintained in the source directories, can
be (should be) modified (overwritten) but the installed file, installed into
base/include generally shouldn?t be changed. If you do make changes in the
include directory it generally causes massive headaches with the
dependencies in the build system.

So from my perspective the installed file should be immutable, but also
hopefully over-writable only after some judicious use of persuasion in the
installer program.

Jeff
______________________________________________________
Jeffrey O. Hill           Email        johill@lanl.gov
LANL MS H820              Voice        505 665 1831
Los Alamos NM 87545 USA   FAX          505 665 5107

Message content: TSPA


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Maren Purves [mailto:m.purves@jach.hawaii.edu]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 5:17 PM
> To: Jeff Hill
> Subject: Re: why doesnt the include file install set the file permisions
> to unwritable?
> 
> Jeff,
> 
> so that the next person can overwrite it?
> We generally have more than one person working on things, at
> least over the years.
> 
> ??
> 
> Maren
> 
> Jeff Hill wrote:
> >
> > So, given this perspective and some others, it appears to be sensible
> for
> > all include files to have their permissions set to un-writable when they
> are
> > installed, but maybe there is some practical issue that prevents this
> from
> > being standard behavior that I don?t see?