[gccsdk] GCC 4.7.4 Rel 1 Dev 2014-01-08: Text file execute permission bit

John Tytgat John.Tytgat at aaug.net
Sat Mar 8 09:33:36 PST 2014

In message <mpro.n24muc00igub602k0 at wingsandbeaks.org.uk.invalid>
          Jeremy Nicoll - ml roinfo <jn.ml.roi.39 at wingsandbeaks.org.uk> wrote:

> John Tytgat <John.Tytgat at aaug.net> wrote:
> >I think it would be better to derive this from RISC OS filetype, i.e.
> >test on Obey, Absolute, ELF, Module, Utility (any others ?).
> If you allowed Obey, why not BASIC?  And then, why not Lua, REXX, Python etc
> - how would the code know whether to treat an arbitrary filetype as
> executable?

I currently can only come up with the pragmatic approach of using a set
of filetypes to fake the execute permission bits.  If we would go for it,
a short list of filetypes is preferred so trying to limit it to those
cases where it really matters.  I think that's filetypes
representing/containing ARM code but I admit that's very arbitrary.  Your
Obey filetype challenge is a good one, I'm not sure whether I can really
justify that.

Duncan, do you actually have usecases where the execute permission bits
matter ? Is this an issue for a certain port ? Or is this just found by
your testing ?

I can only imagine this being an issue for a ported shell, like bash.

John Tytgat, in his comfy chair at home
John.Tytgat at aaug.net

More information about the gcc mailing list