From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 13:49:31 -0400
From: William Josephson <jkw@eecs.harvard.edu>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: [9fans] skulker
Message-ID: <20040616174931.GA55173@mero.morphisms.net>
References: <ee9e417a04061610363db50012@mail.gmail.com>
	<5ba0c21e244f5d15af9b8f5c8bfc894c@vitanuova.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <5ba0c21e244f5d15af9b8f5c8bfc894c@vitanuova.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2i
Topicbox-Message-UUID: a3e3ec92-eacd-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 06:51:26PM +0100, rog@vitanuova.com wrote:
> > b) overloading an existing column is not possible
> > because of the chance of conflict.  you say it's rare
> > but what happens when it occurs?
> 
> i seem to remember that some mode bits on
> unix ls used a different letter for this sort of thing.
> 
> like
> 
> t -> t
> l -> l
> t+l -> T (or something else)

Setuid and setgid bits:

	S -> S
	x -> x
	S+x  -> s

Since the common case is that x is set when s is,
except possibly on directories.