Welcome to the Linux Foundation Forum!

Typos in Exercise 32.1

herecomesbrod
herecomesbrod Posts: 25
in LFS201 Class Forum - Discontinued

In Exercise 32.1 an example of adding permissions, rather than replacing them, is given. The syntax of those commands is wrong, as it includes the = symbol as well as the + or - symbol:

Text in exercise:
$ chmod u=+w,g=-w,o=+rw afile
$ chmod ug=rwx,o=-rw afile

Correct format:
$ chmod u+w,g-w,o+rw afile
$ chmod ug=rwx,o-rw afile

Comments

  • lee42x
    lee42x Posts: 380

    Hello herecomesbrod, Thank you for pointing this out. It will be updated for the next version.

    Regards, Lee

  • coop
    coop Posts: 917

    there was an extensive discussion of this in the Bootcamp forum. It is not "wrong", I am on the road and am not able to cut and paste from that discussion, so if you or Luis can do this I would appreciate it. In short the exercise says to try and do different things. This is not an incorrect syntax, just not the one you might use for a certain end.

  • herecomesbrod
    herecomesbrod Posts: 25

    Thanks for your replies Lee and coop.

    I understand that you are saying that the examples given are not meant to work in a particular way and are for students to investigate. So it is not a typo, but maybe the way the exercise is presented is a bit confusing.

  • luisviveropena
    luisviveropena Posts: 1,347
    edited August 2020

    Hi,

    This is the Coop's answer in this forum thread: https://forum.linuxfoundation.org/discussion/comment/25426#Comment_25426

    Luis is pointing out to you things you already know as best I can tell and let me address what you said directly.
    .
    You are right in some sense and but in another sense you are reading too much into the wording, more than was intended . In >your post you say:
    .
    "Unfortunately u=+... or u=-... etc. don't work as expected, neither on Ubuntu nor on Centos.
    What works is this: ...."
    .
    The problem is with the phrase "as expected" by which you mean "as I expected". There is nothing in the lab that indicates the = >sign should not perform as it actually does. The purpose of the exercise is to try different things and see what happens, and voila >you learned something. I suppose the lab should not say "The syntax is pretty obvious" as that is the source of the confusion and >we will eliminate it in the next version. So thanks for pointing this out. I'm always amazed when someone raises something about >a phrasing that has been there for a number of years, and has never caused confusion before. :) Keeps us on our toes.

    Regards,
    Luis.

Categories

Upcoming Training