Solaris / OpenSolarisThis forum is for the discussion of Solaris, OpenSolaris, OpenIndiana, and illumos.
General Sun, SunOS and Sparc related questions also go here. Any Solaris fork or distribution is welcome.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Distribution: Solaris 11.4, Oracle Linux, Mint, Debian/WSL
Posts: 9,789
Rep:
Ok, the issue wasn't with the permission string but with a mistyped option.
Also, you should use a properly built octal number: 0777, 777 works, but is poor.
There is nothing wrong with typing 777. As a matter of fact I double check with my solaris book (from the sa-100 book printed by sun) and their examples use 3 digits. There is no need to
use the forth digit since i am not looking for anything with
a sticky bit (1 in front of the permissions), setuid (4) and/or setgid (2). So if it works, it's fine. May not be proper but it is correct and not poor.
Second, although I assumed that he had a typo (also had one while he opened this thread), I just wanted to show him (not you) another way to do so. I did not say you were wrong, so don't get defensive Don't forget that he was asking for help
and this is not a forum where we are not allowed to express
our ideas/opinions.
Distribution: Solaris 11.4, Oracle Linux, Mint, Debian/WSL
Posts: 9,789
Rep:
I didn't wrote it is wrong or incorrect, just poor.
The octal syntax is the original one, the symbolic syntax was an enhancement, you are suggesting a more confusing form to a newbie.
In C, the Unix reference language, an octal number is expressed by a leading 0, keeping this convention elsewhere is a good idea, not doing it is lazy.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.