FROM : Andrew Farmer
DATE : Wed Jul 05 11:54:43 2006
On 05 Jul 06, at 02:42, Nir Soffer wrote:
> I pack a directory structure in my app bundle, which used to create
> new "documents" by copying the a template directory and adding
> content. I prefer to have the directory in the bundle and not in
> application support folder, to allow drag and drop install.
>
> Xcode is chmoding the app bundle using a-w, which make my new
> documents not writable by the user.
This is correct behavior. (Although you probably mean "go-w" - XCode
doesn't appear to apply u-w.) Application bundles should never be
writable, anywhere.
> I wonder if this solution is good enough, or I should instead
> change the permissions after copying the template, which require
> little more code. For example, enumerate the new document
> directory and change the permission for all files using absolute
> modes (e.g. 0755). It seems really too much work compared to single
> chmod o+w call.
That shouldn't be necessary. After the template is copied, it should
fall under the ownership of the user executing the application.
> Another solution I considered is packing the template in an
> archive, and unpacking the archive instead of the copying. Is there
> an easier way to unpack an archive than using tar in a sub process?
Not really. Tar is an ancient and crufty format; the expander is
rather more complicated than you probably want to write code for.
That is, in general, an equally reasonable solution, though.
DATE : Wed Jul 05 11:54:43 2006
On 05 Jul 06, at 02:42, Nir Soffer wrote:
> I pack a directory structure in my app bundle, which used to create
> new "documents" by copying the a template directory and adding
> content. I prefer to have the directory in the bundle and not in
> application support folder, to allow drag and drop install.
>
> Xcode is chmoding the app bundle using a-w, which make my new
> documents not writable by the user.
This is correct behavior. (Although you probably mean "go-w" - XCode
doesn't appear to apply u-w.) Application bundles should never be
writable, anywhere.
> I wonder if this solution is good enough, or I should instead
> change the permissions after copying the template, which require
> little more code. For example, enumerate the new document
> directory and change the permission for all files using absolute
> modes (e.g. 0755). It seems really too much work compared to single
> chmod o+w call.
That shouldn't be necessary. After the template is copied, it should
fall under the ownership of the user executing the application.
> Another solution I considered is packing the template in an
> archive, and unpacking the archive instead of the copying. Is there
> an easier way to unpack an archive than using tar in a sub process?
Not really. Tar is an ancient and crufty format; the expander is
rather more complicated than you probably want to write code for.
That is, in general, an equally reasonable solution, though.
| Related mails | Author | Date |
|---|---|---|
| Nir Soffer | Jul 5, 11:42 | |
| Andrew Farmer | Jul 5, 11:54 | |
| Nir Soffer | Jul 5, 14:36 | |
| Tage Borg | Jul 5, 16:12 | |
| Nir Soffer | Jul 5, 17:13 | |
| Sherm Pendley | Jul 5, 19:15 | |
| Julio Cesar Silva… | Jul 5, 19:21 | |
| Nir Soffer | Jul 5, 20:04 | |
| Shawn Erickson | Jul 5, 20:26 | |
| Nir Soffer | Jul 5, 20:39 | |
| Uli Kusterer | Jul 6, 12:40 |






Cocoa mail archive

