Jesus can you people can it!?  This is getting old take your bickering off
the list.  I don't think myself or anyone else would care to hear your
personal attacks and jibes at each other.  I'm hear to learn, not to watch a
verbal boxing match.

Nick Horton

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Corbeil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2000 3:32 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [newbie] permissions on DOS_hda1
> 
> 
> Pittman, Merle wrote:
> 
> > YOU ARROGANT P---k!!
> >
> > So a few math and physics courses (probably from mail 
> order, or your nearest
> > community college) make you all that.  I have 2 advanced degrees in
> > engineering (electronics and computers) yet I think myself 
> no better or
> > smarter than anyone on this list and neither should you.
> 
> Having advanced degrees does not necessarily make you a 
> sharper human being,
> except that you know more about the technical business you 
> studied in.  Humans
> are not reduceable to merely technological terms.  There's a 
> hell of a lot more
> to being a  totally balanced human being than an ego trip 
> over advanced degrees
> in technology.
> 
> Don't know if you're noticed or not, but technology has also 
> been much the
> cause for the serious degradation of the natural environment 
> on this planet;
> therefore, before waving your pieces of paper, think first, 
> because these
> aren't impressive, no where as much as the continuous 
> destruction of the
> natural environment of this planet is.
> 
> If only people with might high pieces of paper in technical 
> studies  could only
> figure out that simple reality.
> 
> My arrogance is only your interpretation.  I wonder if 
> someone who waves highly
> advanced pieces of paper can figure out the simple meaning of 
> this; however, to
> give you a little assistance, what it means is that I'm not 
> at all arrogant and
> it's merely in your eyes that I am.  What I am, though, is 
> FRANK and a no-bs
> type.
> 
> If you prefer bs, pc crap, then by all means, continue to 
> live that way, if
> that's how you like to perceive the world; however, don't 
> ever pretend your two
> pieces of paper to be of any  true significance to me, for 
> reasons as stated
> above.  That's what I have to think about many so-called 
> highly educated types.
> 
> I don't reduce humanity to mathematics or science, but 
> instead take the
> opposite pov, which is to put these sciences to the service 
> of HUMANITY.  Hence
> I BELIEVE in PEOPLE, far more than I believe in the sciences 
> we discover and
> develop, but  use so atrociously.
> 
> If you don't grasp this truth, then believe me when I tell 
> you, you'll never be
> convincing, not to me.
> 
> If you knew how to read, then you'ld have realized very 
> clearly that I wasn't
> bragging, but only describing my pov and reasoning to 
> illustrate.  T'was not at
> all for bragging, because, as per above.
> 
> mike
> 
> 
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Mike Corbeil [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2000 2:39 PM
> > > To:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subject:      Re: [newbie] permissions on DOS_hda1
> > >
> > > Alan Shoemaker wrote:
> > >
> > > > Mike....correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you the guy who's
> > > > been telling some folks in this list that their questions aren't
> > > > appropriate for this forum and to go ask them in the expert
> > > > list?  Well I think that your response in this thread (quoted
> > > > below) was not appropriate for the newbie list.  The remedy here
> > > > was very simple and your four rambling paragraphs have simply
> > > > served to confuse the issue.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Not really, but then maybe I've been accustomed to less 
> than trivial for
> > > longer
> > > than I can recall.  When I first started learning about 
> computers and
> > > programming, my ramble wouldn't have caused any problems, 
> but then I also
> > > had a
> > > few years of math and physics behind me.  Nonetheless, if 
> I think back to
> > > before
> > > that, then I wouldn't have been put off by a more 
> thorough explanation.
> > > Heck, my
> > > father wanted me to help him remodel the house when I was 
> a mere 8 years
> > > old;
> > > therefore, I've been held to above normal expectations 
> for decades.
> > >
> > > If you're confused, then don't think that this means that 
> everyone else
> > > who's a
> > > newbie would also be confused.  As I recall in school, in 
> every course, at
> > > every
> > > level, not everyone was equally comfortable with the material.
> > >
> > > What I prefer to do when I find an answer or document too 
> complicated, is
> > > to
> > > stick with the one I was more comfortable with, as long 
> as it works.
> > > Otherwise,
> > > I just ask questions for clarification.
> > >
> > > We're not communicating between people in grade 1 of 
> elementary school,
> > > here;
> > > therefore, expect some people to provide more thorough 
> answers.  When you
> > > don't
> > > like it, move on.  If newbies seeking help scream in 
> panic, then this will
> > > definitely help to indicate that what you say is true, 
> but as it is,
> > > you're
> > > pretending to be able to speak for them, instead of 
> letting them speak for
> > > themselves.
> > >
> > > As a relative newbie to Linux systems administration, but 
> not to Unix and
> > > programming, I presented information I learned as a 
> newbie to Linux
> > > systems
> > > administration, and based on this, the additional info 
> wasn't out of
> > > context.
> > >
> > > Besides, newbies also need to learn the system and some 
> will catch on very
> > > quickly, while those who don't, can either ask for 
> clarification, or stick
> > > with
> > > the simpler responses they've received.
> > >
> > > How complicated do you want to make this?
> > >
> > > Some people in the newbie list have already proven that 
> they're not
> > > newbie; only
> > > to installing Linux and only in some respects, more in 
> some and less in
> > > others.
> > >
> > > By providing more thorough information in a newbie 
> mailing list, as well
> > > as more
> > > elementary answers, this satisfies the entire group.  If 
> you're not happy
> > > with an
> > > answer which is correct, then skip.  If you're not happy 
> with an answer
> > > which is
> > > not 100% correct, but along the correct line(s), then 
> correct the errors.
> > >
> > > This mailing list is for learning, as far as I'm aware, 
> because getting
> > > help
> > > inherently implies learning.  Part of accepting to learn 
> is accepting to
> > > make
> > > errors or mistakes, and to learn from these.
> > >
> > > Why treat people like babies, instead of giving them 
> something to chew on?
> > >
> > > People using this list to get help for their employment 
> should subscribe
> > > to
> > > professional support mailing lists or resources; 
> therefore, I don't
> > > perceive
> > > these mailing lists except for the much more general 
> audience, including
> > > hobbiests.  My case is neither of these, but instead 
> merely learning, to
> > > merely
> > > become more marketable, kind of like going to school, but 
> without the
> > > tuition
> > > fees and the piece of paper at the end.  You'll find 
> people using these
> > > mailing
> > > lists for various reasons, but you seem to only want to 
> reduce or restrict
> > > to
> > > people who are 100% newbie to computing, which is not the reality.
> > >
> > > If you wish to share more about your pedagogical philosophies or
> > > approaches, then
> > > feel free.  However, I wouldn't bother based on this 
> thread, because what
> > > I presented is not really above the newbie level.  Again, 
> I learned it
> > > during my
> > > newbie phase to Linux systems administration, but then I 
> tend to spend a
> > > fair
> > > amount of time reading ahead and reading various 
> documentation I come
> > > across and
> > > which might be even remotely related.  Just because 
> others don't do this,
> > > doesn't
> > > mean that this approach isn't relevant to people at the 
> newbie level.
> > >
> > > Baby food is nourishing, but it's usually more nourshing 
> when there's an
> > > adequate
> > > amount of vitamins and minerals.
> > >
> > > I'm not knocking the response to set umask to 0 for the 
> dos partitions, in
> > > the
> > > fstab file, but also didn't present anything above newbie 
> level.  Hence,
> > > argumentation or discourse.
> > >
> > > mike
> > >
> > >
> > > > Alan
> > > >
> > > > Mike Corbeil wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Alan Shoemaker wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Bob....you also need to include  umask=0  on that line in
> > > > > > /etc/fstab.
> > > > >
> > > > > Must be a fairly new requirement, or there's a 
> difference in the
> > > default
> > > > > umask value between RH 5.1 and Mandrake, because I 
> don't need umask=0
> > > to be
> > > > > able to write to my dos partitions.  I merely set it 
> to noauto,rw and
> > > this
> > > > > is adequate.
> > > > >
> > > > > The only reason you'ld need to included umask=0 is 
> because of the
> > > > > system-wide default value for it, probably defined in 
> /etc/profile or
> > > > > /etc/bashrc.  This may also depend on whether you're 
> allowing only
> > > root to
> > > > > write or make changes to the dos partitions, or also 
> allowing users.
> > > I
> > > > > don't give users access to my dos partitions, albeit 
> it's a standalone
> > > > > system and I'm the only user anyway.
> > > > >
> > > > > I read somewhere, recently, that umask should be set 
> to 0 in the
> > > system-wide
> > > > > login scripts, but that's the opinion of one author 
> of documentation.
> > > If,
> > > > > however, you're going to set umask to 0 for the dos 
> partition(s), then
> > > you
> > > > > might want to simply set the system-wide value to 
> this anyway, which
> > > means
> > > > > you wouldn't need to include this in fstab.
> > > > >
> > > > > You'ld need to do some research through various 
> documents which touch
> > > upon
> > > > > this subject, before taking my word as gospel.
> > > > >
> > > > > mike
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Alan
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Cox Family wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > another stumper for me?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I just wanted to make a new directory on the DOS 
> partition that I
> > > could
> > > > > > > put some WP8 files in (because the apostrophe 
> comes out on the
> > > printer
> > > > > > > as something stupid in Linux right now) and it 
> said I didn't have
> > > > > > > permission. I checked the "fstab" and hda1 
> includes "user" in
> > > > > > > permissions. I checked properties by 
> right-clicking on the icon
> > > and it
> > > > > > > includes user, group and others for both read and write.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > OK, so I made the directory as super-user, gave it "a+rwx"
> > > permissions,
> > > > > > > and still couldn't save a file in it. Access 
> denied. No permission
> > > to
> > > > > > > write or what ever....
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Again, what am I missing here?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Bob
> > >
> > >
> 
> 
> 

Reply via email to