> From: Vincent Cayenne <vcayenne at mac.com> > It's good but is not *necessary*. We have differing definitions of necessary, apparently. I mean "necessary if you want to avoid trouble." You apparently mean "necessary in that your machine will explode if you don't," and call that wrong. By that definition, I agree. I don't mean the latter, I mean the former. > But I'm interested - have you seen actual repaired > permissions on a 10.3.7 update when you'd repaired permissions > immediately before the update? If so, which files/directories were > indicated? Yes, but it's usually very minor stuff if you repaired permissions *before* the install as well. A recent example resulted in only one permission altered: the iso9660 kernel extension (which says "we are using special permissions here"). A few days ago, a consultant I was with didn't bother with the initial repair permissions before upgrading the half-dozen machines he was working on to 10.3.7 (from 10.3.2 I believe), but DID do it afterward at my insistence. The result was PAGES AND PAGES of fixed permissions from all over the drive. _Chas_ FL-MUG: central Florida's Macintosh User Group. Meetings: second Thursday of the month, 6-9pm, at the Orlando Science Center. http://www.flmug.org