On Thu April 8 2004 21:51, s. keeling wrote: > Incoming from Curtis Sloan: > > On Thu April 8 2004 19:28, s. keeling wrote: > > > Incoming from Curtis Sloan: > > > > I have one partition on one disk that the system believes is > > > > read-only. It is a FAT32 filesystem. The only thing different from > > > > the other FAT32 partitions (I dual boot w/ Windows 98 for games) is > > > > that this partition is primary, > > > > > > What's its fstab entry? > > > > /dev/hdb2 /mnt/storage vfat > > gid=10,users,exec,nodev,suid,rw,quiet,umask=002 1 0 > > <snip> > > I don't know why you want to do all that, but I'll assume you know > what you're doing. You might try shortening it to: > > defaults,gid=10,users,nodev,umask=002 > > since each of rw, suid, and exec are defaults.
Well, I played around with the fstab options and tested this: /dev/hdb2 /mnt/storage vfat defaults,gid=10,users,noexec,nodev,quiet 1 0 And now (as a user) I get: cp: accessing `/mnt/storage/': Permission denied So I added the umask=002 back into the equation, and lo and behold things work again. > In particular, exec is dangerous. I figured, what could it hurt on a FAT32 filesystem full of Windows executables? No less safe than running them under Windows 98. But that was just my thinking, no research. > And I wonder what a Unix style > umask really means when applied to a fat filesystem that simply can't > support Unix style permissions. I can't say I understand mount and UNIX permissions interactions really deeply, but it appears that applying umask to the mount point is the critical determiner, since mount point permissions (e.g. 0775) and the mount 'rw' option themselves don't appear take effect on the underlying FAT32 filesystem. An interesting example is that files that I have marked Read-only from Windows are 0755 under linux, whereas the rest inherit 0775 (presumably from umask). $ ls -l /mnt/media/ dr-xr-xr-x 31 root wheel 16384 Apr 6 21:49 mp3s/ drwxrwxr-x 2 root wheel 8192 Jul 10 2003 recycled/ As a side note, that's also why the mount 'quiet' option. It was irrritating getting UNIX permissions errors I knew full well didn't exist on FAT32. Curtis _______________________________________________ clug-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://clug.ca/mailman/listinfo/clug-talk_clug.ca
