Greetings! Maybe someone has an answer to this!
If I open a PDF file in Acrobat Reader (ths file initially having '644' permissions), and then "print to file" (so that I have a PostScript version of it), the permissions of the PS file generated by Acrobat Reader are '600'.
This is not a particular problem when I am working in the same directory as the file is in.
However, when that machine is NFS-mounted to the machine that does my printing, and I 'lpr' the PS file from the printing machine, then the '600' prevents printing (I get error message "empty file"). This is because the '600' does not allow outsiders to access the file.
All is well if I manually change the PS file permissions in the original directory to '644', since this now allows access.
So my question: Is there a way to get Acrobat Reader to store the PS file it outputs with '644' permissions instead of '600'?
I've had a bit of a look at the Acrobat Reader menus, without seeing anything helpful.
With thanks, Ted.
-------------------------------------------------------------------- E-Mail: (Ted Harding) ted.harding@wlandres.net Fax-to-email: +44 (0)870 094 0861 Date: 02-Jul-11 Time: 22:17:31 ------------------------------ XFMail ------------------------------
On 2/07/11 10:17 PM, (Ted Harding) wrote:
If I open a PDF file in Acrobat Reader (ths file initially having '644' permissions), and then "print to file" (so that I have a PostScript version of it), the permissions of the PS file generated by Acrobat Reader are '600'.
Hi Ted,
I see the same behaviour here, acroread is not respecting the umask. I'd be surprised if Adobe fix this any time soon - have you tried free alternatives like Evince or xpdf?
Otherwise you may be able to work around it by getting NFS to squash or remap UIDs.
Cheers, Rob.
Thanks Rob. That confirms what I suspected! I'll see what I can do with the NFS options. I'll also have a look at Evince etc., but I tend to stick to Acrobat Reader because I trust it to be faithful unto itself; the others may introduce their own version of things (by not having identical resources). At the end of the day, having to change the permissions manually is an irritant rather than a disaster!
Best wishes, Ted.
On 04-Jul-11 10:05:26, Robert Waldie wrote:
On 2/07/11 10:17 PM, (Ted Harding) wrote:
If I open a PDF file in Acrobat Reader (ths file initially having '644' permissions), and then "print to file" (so that I have a PostScript version of it), the permissions of the PS file generated by Acrobat Reader are '600'.
Hi Ted,
I see the same behaviour here, acroread is not respecting the umask. I'd be surprised if Adobe fix this any time soon - have you tried free alternatives like Evince or xpdf?
Otherwise you may be able to work around it by getting NFS to squash or remap UIDs.
Cheers, Rob.
-- Robert Waldie | VP Business Development UK & Europe | Opengear robert.waldie@opengear.com | +44 (0)7766 866159 | http://opengear.com/uk
Opengear Ltd. Herschel House, 58 Herschel St, Slough, Berkshire, England, SL1 1PG Registered in England, No. 07413660
main@lists.alug.org.uk http://www.alug.org.uk/ http://lists.alug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/main Unsubscribe? See message headers or the web site above!
-------------------------------------------------------------------- E-Mail: (Ted Harding) ted.harding@wlandres.net Fax-to-email: +44 (0)870 094 0861 Date: 04-Jul-11 Time: 11:15:27 ------------------------------ XFMail ------------------------------
Ted Harding
Thanks Rob. That confirms what I suspected! I'll see what I can do with the NFS options. I'll also have a look at Evince etc., but I tend to stick to Acrobat Reader because I trust it to be faithful unto itself; the others may introduce their own version of things (by not having identical resources). [...]
Acrobat Reader may be faithful to itself (although reports are mixed, particularly between platforms), but others should be faithful to the ISO standard for PDFs.
Do you want to support Adobe or the vendor-neutral standard?
Hope that informs,
-
MJ Ray -
Robert Waldie -
ted.harding＠wlandres.net