Permissions wrong on newly created file

[Ben Phillips]

I have two systems unrelated to each other with the same problem.
Both systems are running 5.0.5 and have RS505A patch loaded. At the
beginning of the month, a user will log into a certain program. If an
error occurs while running the program, a log file is created
automatically and the ownership and group are associated to the user.
The permissions are set to 644 on the file. Once the file is created,
other users that have errors occur in the same program will
automatically update the log. With the permissions being incorrect,
this can't happen and causes a core file to be created. I've checked
all the users and the umask settings are all set to 0. I'm not
trained in Unix and I've had to learn as I earn. Any suggestions as
to what I else I can check? Thanks!

[Jean-Pierre Radley]

Ben Phillips typed (on Wed, Jul 09, 2003 at 02:04:25PM -0700):
| I have two systems unrelated to each other with the same problem.
| Both systems are running 5.0.5 and have RS505A patch loaded. At the
| beginning of the month, a user will log into a certain program. If an
| error occurs while running the program, a log file is created
| automatically and the ownership and group are associated to the user.
| The permissions are set to 644 on the file. Once the file is created,
| other users that have errors occur in the same program will
| automatically update the log. With the permissions being incorrect,
| this can't happen and causes a core file to be created. I've checked
| all the users and the umask settings are all set to 0. I'm not
| trained in Unix and I've had to learn as I earn. Any suggestions as
| to what I else I can check? Thanks!

Does this mysterious "certain program" create the log file -- with
permissions 644 --, and then change its ownership to that of the
invoking user? Chown (chgrp) will change owner (group) of its
arguments, but do NOT change the permissions of a file.

--
JP

[Ben Phillips]

Jean-Pierre Radley <jpr@jpr.com> wrote in message news:<20030709212821.GC4962@jpradley.jpr.com>...

> Ben Phillips typed (on Wed, Jul 09, 2003 at 02:04:25PM -0700):
> | I have two systems unrelated to each other with the same problem.
> | Both systems are running 5.0.5 and have RS505A patch loaded. At the
> | beginning of the month, a user will log into a certain program. If an
> | error occurs while running the program, a log file is created
> | automatically and the ownership and group are associated to the user.
> | The permissions are set to 644 on the file. Once the file is created,
> | other users that have errors occur in the same program will
> | automatically update the log. With the permissions being incorrect,
> | this can't happen and causes a core file to be created. I've checked
> | all the users and the umask settings are all set to 0. I'm not
> | trained in Unix and I've had to learn as I earn. Any suggestions as
> | to what I else I can check? Thanks!
>
> Does this mysterious "certain program" create the log file -- with
> permissions 644 --, and then change its ownership to that of the
> invoking user? Chown (chgrp) will change owner (group) of its
> arguments, but do NOT change the permissions of a file.

The program was created by the company where I'm employed.
Unfortunately, nobody I've spoken to can confirm how exactly the log
file is created, but under our functional systems the file appears to
be created with permissions of 666, which is what we need. At this
point I need more information from our programmers and I'm going to
have to wait to hear back from them.

[Stefan Marquardt]

On 9 Jul 2003 14:04:25 -0700, [email]celticskyhawk@hotmail.com[/email] (Ben Phillips)
wrote:

>trained in Unix and I've had to learn as I earn. Any suggestions as
>to what I else I can check? Thanks!

umask

[Ben Phillips]

Stefan Marquardt <erase-this.stefan.marquardt@hagebau.de> wrote in message news:<3mjsgvk9699e19b6jmrvoccs2bqu9lgr2v@4ax.com>. ..

> On 9 Jul 2003 14:04:25 -0700, [email]celticskyhawk@hotmail.com[/email] (Ben Phillips)
> wrote:
>

> >trained in Unix and I've had to learn as I earn. Any suggestions as
> >to what I else I can check? Thanks!

>
> umask

As I documented in the original post, the umask settings have been
checked and are correct.