Re: EUREKA!!!! - was [Re: Permissions for an entire PARTITION]

[David Wright]

On Fri 28 Oct 2016 at 18:34:10 (-0500), Richard Owlett wrote:
> On 10/28/2016 5:17 PM, Brian wrote:
> >On Fri 28 Oct 2016 at 15:42:27 -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
> >
> >>Be aware sir that you are the cause of:
> >>multiple renditions of the "Alleluia Chorus" [courtesy Handle] at >
> >>10^^Bels
> >>an "innocent"[snicker] senior citizen is about to have many sleepless
> >>nights
> >>multiple nay-sayers will suffer "EGG ON FACE"  *ROFL* !
> >>
> >>On 10/28/2016 2:30 PM, Jörg-Volker Peetz wrote:
> >>>Did you take a look at the package pmount?
> >>>I use it to mount external disks.
> >>>It requires no changes to /etc/fstab.
> >>
> >>Just in case you have not perceived this quiet discrete message:
> >>   I have not come across pmount before

https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2016/01/msg00015.html
made me think that you had read the "valuable page"
https://wiki.debian.org/ManipulatingISOs
which has a section on pmount.

> >Yes you have. It is on the wiki page
> >
> >  https://wiki.debian.org/Installation+Archive+USBStick
> >
> >You read this page about a week or so ago (you told us so) but seemed
> >more concerned about its style rather than its substance.
> >
> 
> *BULL*
> Said page may have included the string "pmount".
> 
> But it gave no useful info!

Cheers,
David.

Re: EUREKA!!!! - was [Re: Permissions for an entire PARTITION]

[Brian]

On Sun 30 Oct 2016 at 09:19:04 -0400, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:

> On Sunday, October 30, 2016 08:54:45 AM Brian wrote:
> > There are some good things which have come out of this discussion. To
> > use cfdisk, fdisk, dd, mkfs.vfat and grub-install a user has to be
> > root. Being able to mount as non-root is neither here nor there on
> > jessie and stretch for the purpose of installing GRUB, so references to
> > pmount etc can go.
> 
> Are you the maintainer or an author on that wiki page (the one that has been 
> discussed here)?

I don't think wiki pages have maintainers as such, just people who take
an interest and provide additional information, corrections and updates.
Yes, I am the originator of the page, but it is everyone's page.

> If so, have you considered splitting the page into two pages, one for Wheezy 
> (or pre-Jessie) and one for Jessie?  The intent would be to keep valid 
> information for Wheezy for people that might still need it.

As it stands, anyone using pre-Jessie (that's a good way you found of
putting it) could follow the instructions on the page and carry them out
without needing root access. It should be possible to accomodate pre-
and post-Jessie users on the same page by making the requirements for
the different distributions clearer. After all, the commands to use are
practically identical. A small extra section would do it.

--  
Brian.

Re: EUREKA!!!! - was [Re: Permissions for an entire PARTITION]

[rhkramer]

On Sunday, October 30, 2016 08:54:45 AM Brian wrote:
> There are some good things which have come out of this discussion. To
> use cfdisk, fdisk, dd, mkfs.vfat and grub-install a user has to be
> root. Being able to mount as non-root is neither here nor there on
> jessie and stretch for the purpose of installing GRUB, so references to
> pmount etc can go.


Are you the maintainer or an author on that wiki page (the one that has been 
discussed here)?

If so, have you considered splitting the page into two pages, one for Wheezy 
(or pre-Jessie) and one for Jessie?  The intent would be to keep valid 
information for Wheezy for people that might still need it.

Re: EUREKA!!!! - was [Re: Permissions for an entire PARTITION]

[Brian]

On Sun 30 Oct 2016 at 12:22:43 +0300, Reco wrote:

> On Sat, 29 Oct 2016 23:49:17 +0100
> Brian  wrote:
> 
> > They do indeed. Six years. Do you get the feeling it is getting on for
> > unmaintained. (And a wiki page with HAL on it! I ask you). But software
> > changes. Then wiki pages change. 
> 
> Why bother with feelings then you have packages.qa.debian.org?
> It plainly states that:
> 
> The current maintainer is looking for someone who can take over
> maintenance of this package.
> 
> I'm still don't get it how does it make pmount a 'moving target'. It's
> the direct opposite of it IMO.

Software changes over time (features etc), necessitating a review and
possible rewrite of parts of the documentation.

> > Since you wrote this, hundreds of people using GNOME have popped a USB
> > stick into their machines and typed
> > 
> >   dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/
> > 
> > Those who didn't get
> > 
> >   dd: failed to open 'dev/'
> > 
> > will be along soon to report success and explain why.
> 
> #788662, comment 28 to be precise. I'm too lazy to discover that secret
> 'D-Bus interfaces provided by udisks2' personally.

#781495.

> > The floppy group + a udev rule is a Wheezy thing. Not suitable for a
> > wiki relating to a current Debian.
> 
> Just because it looks obsolete does not mean it does not work. Still,
> if you need to do it FreeDesktop way, you'll need an udev rule like
> this:
> 
> ACTION=="add", ENV{ID_BUS}=="usb", KERNEL=="sd*", TAG+="uaccess"

A user without privileges to partition a USB stick or write to its MBR
(which is the case on jessie and later) won't be able to do either of
these.

There are some good things which have come out of this discussion. To
use cfdisk, fdisk, dd, mkfs.vfat and grub-install a user has to be
root. Being able to mount as non-root is neither here nor there on
jessie and stretch for the purpose of installing GRUB, so references to
pmount etc can go.

-- 
Brian.

Re: EUREKA!!!! - was [Re: Permissions for an entire PARTITION]

[Lisi Reisz]

On Sunday 30 October 2016 00:19:34 rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Saturday, October 29, 2016 07:00:02 PM Brian wrote:
> > What happened to curiosity?
>
> Curiosity is a function of available resources, among them time.

The OP says that he has ample time because he is retired and this is his 
retirement occupation.

Lisi

Re: EUREKA!!!! - was [Re: Permissions for an entire PARTITION]

[Reco]

Hi.

On Sat, 29 Oct 2016 23:49:17 +0100
Brian  wrote:

> On Sat 29 Oct 2016 at 23:23:52 +0300, Reco wrote:
> 
> > On Sat, 29 Oct 2016 19:15:53 +0100
> > Brian  wrote:
> > 
> > > I wish you had addressed the "equal exposure" question. Desktops are not
> > > the only environments in town. Leaving non-policykit users out in the
> > > cold is not an option.
> > 
> > True, that does not look good at all. But why bother listing udisks2
> > which is using PolicyKit then?
> 
> In the light of previous points I think there is a non-sequiteur in
> there somwhere.

Nope, it was only an observation. 


> > > A page on pmount is a little harder because it is a moving target.
> > 
> > I honestly lost you here. oldstable, stable, testing and even sid have
> > the same upstream version of pmount - 0.9.23, dated 2010.
> 
> They do indeed. Six years. Do you get the feeling it is getting on for
> unmaintained. (And a wiki page with HAL on it! I ask you). But software
> changes. Then wiki pages change. 

Why bother with feelings then you have packages.qa.debian.org?
It plainly states that:

The current maintainer is looking for someone who can take over
maintenance of this package.


I'm still don't get it how does it make pmount a 'moving target'. It's
the direct opposite of it IMO.

> > > Mounting and unmounting are not really a problem. Users and root can
> > > easily do these. But, as far as I can see, only someone with root
> > > privileges can use dd, cfdisk, fdisk and mkfs.vfat with a removable
> > > device. I'd like to be wrong.
> > 
> > This is a common myth that I'll debunk gladly.
> > 
> > Image copying (dd or any other tool) merely requires ability to write
> > to a block device. Such permissions on removable media should be
> > provided to any current console user by logind (or ConsoleKit if we
> > still need to think about wheezy), or a good old-fashioned
> > 'floppy' (any group name will do) group and a custom udev rule (as of
> > jessie).
> > 
> > Creating any filesystem on a removable media's partition merely requires
> > the same.
> 
> Since you wrote this, hundreds of people using GNOME have popped a USB
> stick into their machines and typed
> 
>   dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/
> 
> Those who didn't get
> 
>   dd: failed to open 'dev/'
> 
> will be along soon to report success and explain why.

#788662, comment 28 to be precise. I'm too lazy to discover that secret
'D-Bus interfaces provided by udisks2' personally.


> The floppy group + a udev rule is a Wheezy thing. Not suitable for a
> wiki relating to a current Debian.

Just because it looks obsolete does not mean it does not work. Still,
if you need to do it FreeDesktop way, you'll need an udev rule like
this:

ACTION=="add", ENV{ID_BUS}=="usb", KERNEL=="sd*", TAG+="uaccess"

Reco

Re: EUREKA!!!! - was [Re: Permissions for an entire PARTITION]

[rhkramer]

On Saturday, October 29, 2016 07:00:02 PM Brian wrote:
> What happened to curiosity?

Curiosity is a function of available resources, among them time.

Re: EUREKA!!!! - was [Re: Permissions for an entire PARTITION]

[Brian]

On Sat 29 Oct 2016 at 16:28:24 -0400, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:

> On Saturday, October 29, 2016 03:53:21 PM Brian wrote:
> > On Sat 29 Oct 2016 at 15:28:14 -0400, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Saturday, October 29, 2016 08:54:59 AM Reco wrote:
> > > > On Sat, 29 Oct 2016 08:16:18 -0400
> > > > 
> > > > rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > I'm not the OP or anybody that has participated in this thread so
> > > > > far.
> > > > 
> > > > [1] tells me otherwise, for the 'participation' part. I take it that
> > > > this e-mail I'm replying to is shared among several people, then?
> > > 
> > > Oops, sorry, you're right--somehow I forgot all about that.
> > > 
> > > > I believe you're missing the point here. The page in question is not
> > > > supposed to provide information on mounting anything as a *key piece*
> > > > in the first place due to very nature of the topic the page describes.
> > > > 
> > > > But since such information is in there for some reason, and it's
> > > > covering *both* mounting and unmounting in a compact enough form - it
> > > > can be used as an example for mounting and unmounting also.
> > > 
> > > If I say anything, I'll just be belaboring the point further, so I won't.
> > > Or, I will, I was only trying to support the OP who said there was
> > > nothing of
> > 
> > What would you have wanted to see? Please be detailed. The OP is
> > unlikely to respond, so we are relying on you.
> 
> I'll have to think about that--maybe nothing--my first thoughts are that:
>* I agree that page didn't need to go any deeper,
>* but I also agree with the comment the OP made, something like there was 
> nothing substantial about pmount on that page--he apparently (or might have) 
> tried one of the other two alternatives, and failing that, have asked for 
> more 
> help, as he did...

There are very few wiki pages which are so completely self-contained
that one does not have to consult outside sources. It should not be
expected that they be complete in every aspect. Anything not deemed
substantial can be looked up elsewhere, starting, perhaps, with a man
page on a local machine.

What happened to curiosity?

-- 
Brian.
 

Re: EUREKA!!!! - was [Re: Permissions for an entire PARTITION]

[Brian]

On Sat 29 Oct 2016 at 23:23:52 +0300, Reco wrote:

> On Sat, 29 Oct 2016 19:15:53 +0100
> Brian  wrote:
> 
> > I wish you had addressed the "equal exposure" question. Desktops are not
> > the only environments in town. Leaving non-policykit users out in the
> > cold is not an option.
> 
> True, that does not look good at all. But why bother listing udisks2
> which is using PolicyKit then?

In the light of previous points I think there is a non-sequiteur in
there somwhere.
 
> Besides, in modern Debian it takes a certain amount of skill and
> determination *not* to use PolicyKit ;)

Maybe. Nothing to do with whether policykit is on a machine or not, of
course.

> > It doesn't come down to that; using a desktop filemanager is just one of
> > the alternatives. One could equally well ask why it is has to mentioned
> > when there is
> > 
> >  > Install pmount, udevil or udisks2 and use one . 
> 
> Indeed. All this confusion could be avoided by simple 'please mount the
> USB stick to this mountpoint'. Again, the page describes rather
> advanced topic.

As said, a rewrite is in the offing. The reality is that all operations
should be with root privileges.
 
> > Providing a range of advice for a range of people isn't exactly easy in
> > all situations. Advice on installing a wifi kernel module is easy -
> > there is only one for each chipset.
> 
> I honestly wish that this was true. Sadly, there's Broadcom, see [1]
> for the gory details.

There are always exceptions.

> > A page on pmount is a little harder because it is a moving target.
> 
> I honestly lost you here. oldstable, stable, testing and even sid have
> the same upstream version of pmount - 0.9.23, dated 2010.

They do indeed. Six years. Do you get the feeling it is getting on for
unmaintained. (And a wiki page with HAL on it! I ask you). But software
changes. Then wiki pages change. 

> > (The link you gave has out-of-date info on HAL). Anything more 
> > complex can always be criticised as time moves on.
> 
> The page itself is somewhat outdated, true. Someone should cleanup that
> obsolete hal reference.

Don't look at me.

> > But your sort of constructive criticism is valuable.
> 
> You're welcome, I guess.
> 
> > You are getting carried away here. Both are for *automatically* mounting
> > and unmounting removable media, which is not a focus for the task.
> > 
> > There is no sign of supermount in stable or unstable.
> 
> True. That's something that I missed.

We all miss something.

> > As little as possible should be done as root is a good principle.
> 
> mount(2) system call is a privileged one regardless of the tool used.
> Hence a root intervention in one form or the other is needed.
> 
> Whenever such privilege escalation is done by trusted daemon (udisks2),
> or by hand (su, sudo) for the purposes of mounting and unmounting is not
> relevant. Assuming, for the sake of simplicity, that all implementations
> of privilege escalation (su, sudo, policykit, trusted suid binaries
> such as pmount) are free of security bugs.
> 
> If it was desirable to exclude root intervention whenever possible in
> this task - the page in question would suggest fusefat instead.

Something to consider and test. Thanks.
 
> > C'mon; pointing out a typo! This is unworthy of you, even as an aside.
> 
> Disregard the typo comment then as it was not pointed to the article
> quality. Not all mount(8) invokations require root, that was the point.
> 
> > Mounting and unmounting are not really a problem. Users and root can
> > easily do these. But, as far as I can see, only someone with root
> > privileges can use dd, cfdisk, fdisk and mkfs.vfat with a removable
> > device. I'd like to be wrong.
> 
> This is a common myth that I'll debunk gladly.
> 
> Image copying (dd or any other tool) merely requires ability to write
> to a block device. Such permissions on removable media should be
> provided to any current console user by logind (or ConsoleKit if we
> still need to think about wheezy), or a good old-fashioned
> 'floppy' (any group name will do) group and a custom udev rule (as of
> jessie).
> 
> Creating any filesystem on a removable media's partition merely requires
> the same.

Since you wrote this, hundreds of people using GNOME have popped a USB
stick into their machines and typed

  dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/

Those who didn't get

  dd: failed to open 'dev/'

will be along soon to report success and explain why.

The floppy group + a udev rule is a Wheezy thing. Not suitable for a
wiki relating to a current Debian.

-- 
Brian.

Re: EUREKA!!!! - was [Re: Permissions for an entire PARTITION]

[rhkramer]

On Saturday, October 29, 2016 03:53:21 PM Brian wrote:
> On Sat 29 Oct 2016 at 15:28:14 -0400, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Saturday, October 29, 2016 08:54:59 AM Reco wrote:
> > > On Sat, 29 Oct 2016 08:16:18 -0400
> > > 
> > > rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > I'm not the OP or anybody that has participated in this thread so
> > > > far.
> > > 
> > > [1] tells me otherwise, for the 'participation' part. I take it that
> > > this e-mail I'm replying to is shared among several people, then?
> > 
> > Oops, sorry, you're right--somehow I forgot all about that.
> > 
> > > I believe you're missing the point here. The page in question is not
> > > supposed to provide information on mounting anything as a *key piece*
> > > in the first place due to very nature of the topic the page describes.
> > > 
> > > But since such information is in there for some reason, and it's
> > > covering *both* mounting and unmounting in a compact enough form - it
> > > can be used as an example for mounting and unmounting also.
> > 
> > If I say anything, I'll just be belaboring the point further, so I won't.
> > Or, I will, I was only trying to support the OP who said there was
> > nothing of
> 
> What would you have wanted to see? Please be detailed. The OP is
> unlikely to respond, so we are relying on you.

I'll have to think about that--maybe nothing--my first thoughts are that:
   * I agree that page didn't need to go any deeper,
   * but I also agree with the comment the OP made, something like there was 
nothing substantial about pmount on that page--he apparently (or might have) 
tried one of the other two alternatives, and failing that, have asked for more 
help, as he did...

Re: EUREKA!!!! - was [Re: Permissions for an entire PARTITION]

[Reco]

Hi.

On Sat, 29 Oct 2016 19:15:53 +0100
Brian  wrote:

> On Sat 29 Oct 2016 at 18:48:11 +0300, Reco wrote:
> 
> > On Sat, 29 Oct 2016 15:09:09 +0100
> > Brian  wrote:
> > 
> > > On Sat 29 Oct 2016 at 15:54:59 +0300, Reco wrote:
> > > 
> > > > On Sat, 29 Oct 2016 08:16:18 -0400
> > > > rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > I'll say that the wiki page gave no hint as to which of the three 
> > > > > options to 
> > > > > install, or any hint that one might work better than another.
> > > > 
> > > > The page is describing 'Producing an automated install of a Debian
> > > > operating system from a USB stick', to quote it. For such an advanced
> > > > task it can be safely assumed IMO that the person who's implementing the
> > > > instruction is familiar with the basic concepts of a 'file system' or
> > > > 'mounting'.
> > > 
> > > The question of providing guidance on which of the three tools to use is
> > > an interesting one. As far as possible a wiki page like this one should
> > > stick to facts and technical matters; venturing into the area of opinion
> > > isn't the way to go, IMO. Do any of these tools have a distinct
> > > technical advantage for the purpose of installing GRUB is the question
> > > to ask and answer? If the answer is "no" don't they deserve equal
> > > exposure?
> > 
> > No advantage that I'm aware of. In fact, the whole paragraph could be
> > shortened to already existing text:
> > 
> > If you are working within one of the desktop environments it is very
> > likely the mounting can be done from he file manager which comes with
> > it. This is because udisks2 will be on the system. A label will
> > possibly be used for the mount point.
> 
> I wish you had addressed the "equal exposure" question. Desktops are not
> the only environments in town. Leaving non-policykit users out in the
> cold is not an option.

True, that does not look good at all. But why bother listing udisks2
which is using PolicyKit then?

Besides, in modern Debian it takes a certain amount of skill and
determination *not* to use PolicyKit ;)


> > > The tools exist and all can be assumed to work.  The choice of which one
> > > to use is up to the user. For many users a couple of clicks on a desktop
> > > will get the stick mounted; others might like the challenge of using a
> > > new tool. 
> > 
> > My point exactly. Why bother naming all these tools if it all comes down
> > to "you might use your file manager to do this part for you as well"?
> 
> It doesn't come down to that; using a desktop filemanager is just one of
> the alternatives. One could equally well ask why it is has to mentioned
> when there is
> 
>  > Install pmount, udevil or udisks2 and use one . 

Indeed. All this confusion could be avoided by simple 'please mount the
USB stick to this mountpoint'. Again, the page describes rather
advanced topic.


> Providing a range of advice for a range of people isn't exactly easy in
> all situations. Advice on installing a wifi kernel module is easy -
> there is only one for each chipset.

I honestly wish that this was true. Sadly, there's Broadcom, see [1]
for the gory details.


> A page on pmount is a little harder because it is a moving target.

I honestly lost you here. oldstable, stable, testing and even sid have
the same upstream version of pmount - 0.9.23, dated 2010.


> (The link you gave has out-of-date info on HAL). Anything more 
> complex can always be criticised as time moves on.

The page itself is somewhat outdated, true. Someone should cleanup that
obsolete hal reference.


> But your sort of constructive criticism is valuable.

You're welcome, I guess.


> > > A few might say - "Hey, interesting, never knew about that;
> > > I'll give it a go". And then go on to use it in another context.
> > 
> > True, but why stop here? Author(s?) of the page might mention usbmount
> > and supermount as well.
> 
> You are getting carried away here. Both are for *automatically* mounting
> and unmounting removable media, which is not a focus for the task.
> 
> There is no sign of supermount in stable or unstable.

True. That's something that I missed.


> > > > It can be argued (again IMO) that the 3 tools proposed are not the best
> > > > ones available for the task, or downright redundant due to availability
> > > > of mount(8), but all three mentioned tools are in fact are links to [2].
> > > > Broken ones (for me at least), but they are links to manpages for the
> > > > mentioned tools. Surely a manpage can be viewed as a suitable source of
> > > > hints you're referring to.
> > > 
> > > mount is a root-only tool; the others aren't. Need I say more?
> > 
> > Yes, I believe you do.
> 
> As little as possible should be done as root is a good principle.

mount(2) system call is a privileged one regardless of the tool used.
Hence a root intervention in one form or the other is needed.

Whenever such privilege escalation is done by trusted daemon 

Re: EUREKA!!!! - was [Re: Permissions for an entire PARTITION]

[Brian]

On Sat 29 Oct 2016 at 15:28:14 -0400, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:

> On Saturday, October 29, 2016 08:54:59 AM Reco wrote:
> > On Sat, 29 Oct 2016 08:16:18 -0400
> > rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> 
> > > I'm not the OP or anybody that has participated in this thread so far.
> > 
> > [1] tells me otherwise, for the 'participation' part. I take it that
> > this e-mail I'm replying to is shared among several people, then?
> 
> Oops, sorry, you're right--somehow I forgot all about that.
> 
> > I believe you're missing the point here. The page in question is not
> > supposed to provide information on mounting anything as a *key piece*
> > in the first place due to very nature of the topic the page describes.
> > 
> > But since such information is in there for some reason, and it's
> > covering *both* mounting and unmounting in a compact enough form - it
> > can be used as an example for mounting and unmounting also.
> 
> If I say anything, I'll just be belaboring the point further, so I won't. Or, 
> I will, I was only trying to support the OP who said there was nothing of 

What would you have wanted to see? Please be detailed. The OP is
unlikely to respond, so we are relying on you.

-- 
Brian/

Re: EUREKA!!!! - was [Re: Permissions for an entire PARTITION]

[rhkramer]

On Saturday, October 29, 2016 08:54:59 AM Reco wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Oct 2016 08:16:18 -0400
> rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:

> > I'm not the OP or anybody that has participated in this thread so far.
> 
> [1] tells me otherwise, for the 'participation' part. I take it that
> this e-mail I'm replying to is shared among several people, then?

Oops, sorry, you're right--somehow I forgot all about that.

> I believe you're missing the point here. The page in question is not
> supposed to provide information on mounting anything as a *key piece*
> in the first place due to very nature of the topic the page describes.
> 
> But since such information is in there for some reason, and it's
> covering *both* mounting and unmounting in a compact enough form - it
> can be used as an example for mounting and unmounting also.

If I say anything, I'll just be belaboring the point further, so I won't. Or, 
I will, I was only trying to support the OP who said there was nothing of 
significance (or some similar word) (re: pmount) on that page.

Now I'll just hide my head in the sand ;-)

Re: EUREKA!!!! - was [Re: Permissions for an entire PARTITION]

[Brian]

On Sat 29 Oct 2016 at 18:48:11 +0300, Reco wrote:

> On Sat, 29 Oct 2016 15:09:09 +0100
> Brian  wrote:
> 
> > On Sat 29 Oct 2016 at 15:54:59 +0300, Reco wrote:
> > 
> > > On Sat, 29 Oct 2016 08:16:18 -0400
> > > rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > 
> > > > I'll say that the wiki page gave no hint as to which of the three 
> > > > options to 
> > > > install, or any hint that one might work better than another.
> > > 
> > > The page is describing 'Producing an automated install of a Debian
> > > operating system from a USB stick', to quote it. For such an advanced
> > > task it can be safely assumed IMO that the person who's implementing the
> > > instruction is familiar with the basic concepts of a 'file system' or
> > > 'mounting'.
> > 
> > The question of providing guidance on which of the three tools to use is
> > an interesting one. As far as possible a wiki page like this one should
> > stick to facts and technical matters; venturing into the area of opinion
> > isn't the way to go, IMO. Do any of these tools have a distinct
> > technical advantage for the purpose of installing GRUB is the question
> > to ask and answer? If the answer is "no" don't they deserve equal
> > exposure?
> 
> No advantage that I'm aware of. In fact, the whole paragraph could be
> shortened to already existing text:
> 
> If you are working within one of the desktop environments it is very
> likely the mounting can be done from he file manager which comes with
> it. This is because udisks2 will be on the system. A label will
> possibly be used for the mount point.

I wish you had addressed the "equal exposure" question. Desktops are not
the only environments in town. Leaving non-policykit users out in the
cold is not an option.
 
> > The tools exist and all can be assumed to work.  The choice of which one
> > to use is up to the user. For many users a couple of clicks on a desktop
> > will get the stick mounted; others might like the challenge of using a
> > new tool. 
> 
> My point exactly. Why bother naming all these tools if it all comes down
> to "you might use your file manager to do this part for you as well"?

It doesn't come down to that; using a desktop filemanager is just one of
the alternatives. One could equally well ask why it is has to mentioned
when there is

 > Install pmount, udevil or udisks2 and use one . 

Providing a range of advice for a range of people isn't exactly easy in
all situations. Advice on installing a wifi kernel module is easy -
there is only one for each chipset. A page on pmount is a little harder
because it is a moving target. (The link you gave has out-of-date info
on HAL). Anything more complex can always be criticised as time moves
on.

But your sort of constructive criticism is valuable.

> > A few might say - "Hey, interesting, never knew about that;
> > I'll give it a go". And then go on to use it in another context.
> 
> True, but why stop here? Author(s?) of the page might mention usbmount
> and supermount as well.

You are getting carried away here. Both are for *automatically* mounting
and unmounting removable media, which is not a focus for the task.

There is no sign of supermount in stable or unstable.
 
> > > It can be argued (again IMO) that the 3 tools proposed are not the best
> > > ones available for the task, or downright redundant due to availability
> > > of mount(8), but all three mentioned tools are in fact are links to [2].
> > > Broken ones (for me at least), but they are links to manpages for the
> > > mentioned tools. Surely a manpage can be viewed as a suitable source of
> > > hints you're referring to.
> > 
> > mount is a root-only tool; the others aren't. Need I say more?
> 
> Yes, I believe you do.

As little as possible should be done as root is a good principle.

> The page mentions 'Check the mount point from within the fie manager or
> with the command "mount"' (curious typo btw), rightfully assuming that
> one does not need to be root to do that.

C'mon; pointing out a typo! This is unworthy of you, even as an aside.
 
> The bottom of the page mentions at least one operation that needs to be
> performed as root, so why exactly mounting USB stick as root is somehow
> a bad thing in this context?

Excellent point. This will lead to a rewriting.

The problem at the time was that Wheezy and Jessie behaved differently.
It is mentioned (bug #751892) that root may be necessary. Now Wheezy is
unsupported references to it can go. 

> > The Debian manpages site is broken and awaiting relocation to a new
> > host.
> 
> Here I can only assume that this useful service was available at the
> time that page was written.

Good thinking, Batman. :)
 
> > > >  Of course, 
> > > > until this issue came up, no one may have expected one to work better 
> > > > than 
> > > > another, so then someone reading that page could, quite appropriately, 
> > > > try one 
> > > > and not the others, and assume that there was no more useful 
> > > > information 

Re: EUREKA!!!! - was [Re: Permissions for an entire PARTITION]

[Reco]

Hi.

On Sat, 29 Oct 2016 15:09:09 +0100
Brian  wrote:

> On Sat 29 Oct 2016 at 15:54:59 +0300, Reco wrote:
> 
> > On Sat, 29 Oct 2016 08:16:18 -0400
> > rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> > 
> > > I'll say that the wiki page gave no hint as to which of the three options 
> > > to 
> > > install, or any hint that one might work better than another.
> > 
> > The page is describing 'Producing an automated install of a Debian
> > operating system from a USB stick', to quote it. For such an advanced
> > task it can be safely assumed IMO that the person who's implementing the
> > instruction is familiar with the basic concepts of a 'file system' or
> > 'mounting'.
> 
> The question of providing guidance on which of the three tools to use is
> an interesting one. As far as possible a wiki page like this one should
> stick to facts and technical matters; venturing into the area of opinion
> isn't the way to go, IMO. Do any of these tools have a distinct
> technical advantage for the purpose of installing GRUB is the question
> to ask and answer? If the answer is "no" don't they deserve equal
> exposure?

No advantage that I'm aware of. In fact, the whole paragraph could be
shortened to already existing text:

If you are working within one of the desktop environments it is very
likely the mounting can be done from he file manager which comes with
it. This is because udisks2 will be on the system. A label will
possibly be used for the mount point.



> The tools exist and all can be assumed to work.  The choice of which one
> to use is up to the user. For many users a couple of clicks on a desktop
> will get the stick mounted; others might like the challenge of using a
> new tool. 

My point exactly. Why bother naming all these tools if it all comes down
to "you might use your file manager to do this part for you as well"?


> A few might say - "Hey, interesting, never knew about that;
> I'll give it a go". And then go on to use it in another context.

True, but why stop here? Author(s?) of the page might mention usbmount
and supermount as well.


> > It can be argued (again IMO) that the 3 tools proposed are not the best
> > ones available for the task, or downright redundant due to availability
> > of mount(8), but all three mentioned tools are in fact are links to [2].
> > Broken ones (for me at least), but they are links to manpages for the
> > mentioned tools. Surely a manpage can be viewed as a suitable source of
> > hints you're referring to.
> 
> mount is a root-only tool; the others aren't. Need I say more?

Yes, I believe you do.

The page mentions 'Check the mount point from within the fie manager or
with the command "mount"' (curious typo btw), rightfully assuming that
one does not need to be root to do that.

The bottom of the page mentions at least one operation that needs to be
performed as root, so why exactly mounting USB stick as root is somehow
a bad thing in this context?


> The Debian manpages site is broken and awaiting relocation to a new
> host.

Here I can only assume that this useful service was available at the
time that page was written.


> > >  Of course, 
> > > until this issue came up, no one may have expected one to work better 
> > > than 
> > > another, so then someone reading that page could, quite appropriately, 
> > > try one 
> > > and not the others, and assume that there was no more useful information 
> > > on 
> > > the page.
> > 
> > I agree that the page provides unnecessary choice in this regard, and
> > for the sake of clarity of this topic [3] would be more appropriate.
> 
> Fair enough. But why not udisks2? After all, it will already be on many
> machines.

No reason, really. pmount was mentioned first on the page.


Reco

Re: EUREKA!!!! - was [Re: Permissions for an entire PARTITION]

[Brian]

On Sat 29 Oct 2016 at 15:54:59 +0300, Reco wrote:

> On Sat, 29 Oct 2016 08:16:18 -0400
> rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> 
> > I'll say that the wiki page gave no hint as to which of the three options 
> > to 
> > install, or any hint that one might work better than another.
> 
> The page is describing 'Producing an automated install of a Debian
> operating system from a USB stick', to quote it. For such an advanced
> task it can be safely assumed IMO that the person who's implementing the
> instruction is familiar with the basic concepts of a 'file system' or
> 'mounting'.

The question of providing guidance on which of the three tools to use is
an interesting one. As far as possible a wiki page like this one should
stick to facts and technical matters; venturing into the area of opinion
isn't the way to go, IMO. Do any of these tools have a distinct
technical advantage for the purpose of installing GRUB is the question
to ask and answer? If the answer is "no" don't they deserve equal
exposure?

The tools exist and all can be assumed to work.  The choice of which one
to use is up to the user. For many users a couple of clicks on a desktop
will get the stick mounted; others might like the challenge of using a
new tool. A few might say - "Hey, interesting, never knew about that;
I'll give it a go". And then go on to use it in another context.

> It can be argued (again IMO) that the 3 tools proposed are not the best
> ones available for the task, or downright redundant due to availability
> of mount(8), but all three mentioned tools are in fact are links to [2].
> Broken ones (for me at least), but they are links to manpages for the
> mentioned tools. Surely a manpage can be viewed as a suitable source of
> hints you're referring to.

mount is a root-only tool; the others aren't. Need I say more?

The Debian manpages site is broken and awaiting relocation to a new
host.

> >  Of course, 
> > until this issue came up, no one may have expected one to work better than 
> > another, so then someone reading that page could, quite appropriately, try 
> > one 
> > and not the others, and assume that there was no more useful information on 
> > the page.
> 
> I agree that the page provides unnecessary choice in this regard, and
> for the sake of clarity of this topic [3] would be more appropriate.

Fair enough. But why not udisks2? After all, it will already be on many
machines.

> > Someone with a more experimental nature might have tried all three, but, 
> > like 
> > I hope I implied, why would anyone expect that to make a difference?
> 
> Different tools. Different programming languages to implement
> them. Different dependencies for said tools. Surely all of them should
> behave exact the same behavior (sarcasm implied).

Sarcasm noted :).

By its very nature a wiki page has prescriptive aspects to it but that
does not need to be extended to everything on it. Where there is more
than one way to do something there can surely be a case for mentioning
all of them. If choice confuses there is no answer to that apart from a
user tossing a coin.

When it comes to making an archive there would be at least one -user
member who would be profoundly put out if xorriso was not one of the
choices for the task. :)

-- 
Brian.

Re: EUREKA!!!! - was [Re: Permissions for an entire PARTITION]

[Reco]

Hi.

On Sat, 29 Oct 2016 08:16:18 -0400
rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:

> On Saturday, October 29, 2016 05:17:30 AM Reco wrote:
> > On Fri, 28 Oct 2016 18:34:10 -0500
> > Richard Owlett  wrote:
> 
> > > But it gave no useful info!
> > 
> > I dunno ;). Quoting the page, this:
> > 
> > Installing GRUB on the USB Stick
> > Install pmount, udevil or udisks2 and use one of the following commands
> > to mount the primary partition. The mount point for pmount
> > is /media/ARCHIVE. ...
> > 
> > pmount /dev/disk/by-label/ARCHIVE ARCHIVE
> > 
> > seems like a useful info to me about mounting certain USB stick to a
> > directory with pmount.
> 
> I'm not the OP or anybody that has participated in this thread so far.

[1] tells me otherwise, for the 'participation' part. I take it that
this e-mail I'm replying to is shared among several people, then?


> I'll say that the wiki page gave no hint as to which of the three options to 
> install, or any hint that one might work better than another.

The page is describing 'Producing an automated install of a Debian
operating system from a USB stick', to quote it. For such an advanced
task it can be safely assumed IMO that the person who's implementing the
instruction is familiar with the basic concepts of a 'file system' or
'mounting'.

It can be argued (again IMO) that the 3 tools proposed are not the best
ones available for the task, or downright redundant due to availability
of mount(8), but all three mentioned tools are in fact are links to [2].
Broken ones (for me at least), but they are links to manpages for the
mentioned tools. Surely a manpage can be viewed as a suitable source of
hints you're referring to.


>  Of course, 
> until this issue came up, no one may have expected one to work better than 
> another, so then someone reading that page could, quite appropriately, try 
> one 
> and not the others, and assume that there was no more useful information on 
> the page.

I agree that the page provides unnecessary choice in this regard, and
for the sake of clarity of this topic [3] would be more appropriate.


> Someone with a more experimental nature might have tried all three, but, like 
> I hope I implied, why would anyone expect that to make a difference?

Different tools. Different programming languages to implement
them. Different dependencies for said tools. Surely all of them should
behave exact the same behavior (sarcasm implied).


> I guess maybe I'm doing the same thing some others seem to do--belaboring a 
> point that maybe shouldn't have even come up as issue.
> 
> If someone read the page and didn't find / recognize a key piece of 
> information 
> on that page, maybe the page could use a revision.

I believe you're missing the point here. The page in question is not
supposed to provide information on mounting anything as a *key piece*
in the first place due to very nature of the topic the page describes.

But since such information is in there for some reason, and it's
covering *both* mounting and unmounting in a compact enough form - it
can be used as an example for mounting and unmounting also.


Reco

[1]
https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/201610260711.18646.rhkra...@gmail.com

[2] http://manpages.debian.org/

[3] https://wiki.debian.org/pmount

Re: EUREKA!!!! - was [Re: Permissions for an entire PARTITION]

[rhkramer]

On Saturday, October 29, 2016 05:17:30 AM Reco wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Oct 2016 18:34:10 -0500
> Richard Owlett  wrote:

> > But it gave no useful info!
> 
> I dunno ;). Quoting the page, this:
> 
> Installing GRUB on the USB Stick
> Install pmount, udevil or udisks2 and use one of the following commands
> to mount the primary partition. The mount point for pmount
> is /media/ARCHIVE. ...
> 
> pmount /dev/disk/by-label/ARCHIVE ARCHIVE
> 
> seems like a useful info to me about mounting certain USB stick to a
> directory with pmount.

I'm not the OP or anybody that has participated in this thread so far.

I don't know whether I want to comment or not.

I'll say that the wiki page gave no hint as to which of the three options to 
install, or any hint that one might work better than another.  Of course, 
until this issue came up, no one may have expected one to work better than 
another, so then someone reading that page could, quite appropriately, try one 
and not the others, and assume that there was no more useful information on 
the page.

Someone with a more experimental nature might have tried all three, but, like 
I hope I implied, why would anyone expect that to make a difference?

I guess maybe I'm doing the same thing some others seem to do--belaboring a 
point that maybe shouldn't have even come up as issue.

If someone read the page and didn't find / recognize a key piece of information 
on that page, maybe the page could use a revision.

If it was because no one previously recognized something (like that pmount, 
udevil or udisks2 might each behave slightly different, and that, therefore, 
one might work when another might not), that would seem like another reason to 
consider a revision of the page.

To argue about the subject just makes the list seem unfriendly, to newbies as 
well as "oldbies". ;-)

Re: EUREKA!!!! - was [Re: Permissions for an entire PARTITION]

[Reco]

Hi.

On Fri, 28 Oct 2016 18:34:10 -0500
Richard Owlett  wrote:

> On 10/28/2016 5:17 PM, Brian wrote:
> > On Fri 28 Oct 2016 at 15:42:27 -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
> >
> >> Be aware sir that you are the cause of:
> >> multiple renditions of the "Alleluia Chorus" [courtesy Handle] at >
> >> 10^^Bels
> >> an "innocent"[snicker] senior citizen is about to have many sleepless
> >> nights
> >> multiple nay-sayers will suffer "EGG ON FACE"  *ROFL* !
> >>
> >> On 10/28/2016 2:30 PM, Jörg-Volker Peetz wrote:
> >>> Did you take a look at the package pmount?
> >>> I use it to mount external disks.
> >>> It requires no changes to /etc/fstab.
> >>
> >> Just in case you have not perceived this quiet discrete message:
> >>I have not come across pmount before
> >
> > Yes you have. It is on the wiki page
> >
> >   https://wiki.debian.org/Installation+Archive+USBStick
> >
> > You read this page about a week or so ago (you told us so) but seemed
> > more concerned about its style rather than its substance.
> >
> 
> *BULL*
> Said page may have included the string "pmount".
> 
> But it gave no useful info!

I dunno ;). Quoting the page, this:

Installing GRUB on the USB Stick
Install pmount, udevil or udisks2 and use one of the following commands
to mount the primary partition. The mount point for pmount
is /media/ARCHIVE. ...

pmount /dev/disk/by-label/ARCHIVE ARCHIVE

seems like a useful info to me about mounting certain USB stick to a
directory with pmount.

Reco

Re: EUREKA!!!! - was [Re: Permissions for an entire PARTITION]

[Richard Owlett]

On 10/28/2016 5:17 PM, Brian wrote:

On Fri 28 Oct 2016 at 15:42:27 -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:


Be aware sir that you are the cause of:
multiple renditions of the "Alleluia Chorus" [courtesy Handle] at >
10^^Bels
an "innocent"[snicker] senior citizen is about to have many sleepless
nights
multiple nay-sayers will suffer "EGG ON FACE"  *ROFL* !

On 10/28/2016 2:30 PM, Jörg-Volker Peetz wrote:

Did you take a look at the package pmount?
I use it to mount external disks.
It requires no changes to /etc/fstab.


Just in case you have not perceived this quiet discrete message:
   I have not come across pmount before


Yes you have. It is on the wiki page

  https://wiki.debian.org/Installation+Archive+USBStick

You read this page about a week or so ago (you told us so) but seemed
more concerned about its style rather than its substance.



*BULL*
Said page may have included the string "pmount".

But it gave no useful info!

Re: EUREKA!!!! - was [Re: Permissions for an entire PARTITION]

[Brian]

On Fri 28 Oct 2016 at 15:42:27 -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:

> Be aware sir that you are the cause of:
>multiple renditions of the "Alleluia Chorus" [courtesy Handle] at >
> 10^^Bels
>an "innocent"[snicker] senior citizen is about to have many sleepless
> nights
>multiple nay-sayers will suffer "EGG ON FACE"  *ROFL* !
> 
> On 10/28/2016 2:30 PM, Jörg-Volker Peetz wrote:
> >Did you take a look at the package pmount?
> >I use it to mount external disks.
> >It requires no changes to /etc/fstab.
> 
> Just in case you have not perceived this quiet discrete message:
>   I have not come across pmount before

Yes you have. It is on the wiki page

 https://wiki.debian.org/Installation+Archive+USBStick

You read this page about a week or so ago (you told us so) but seemed
more concerned about its style rather than its substance.

-- 
Brian.

Re: EUREKA!!!! - was [Re: Permissions for an entire PARTITION]

[John L. Ries]

Better than what Archimedes did (yes, I know I'm top posting).

--|
John L. Ries  |
Salford Systems   |
Phone: (619)543-8880 x107 |
or (435)867-8885  |
--|


On Fri, 28 Oct 2016, Richard Owlett wrote:

> Be aware sir that you are the cause of:
>multiple renditions of the "Alleluia Chorus" [courtesy Handle] at >
> 10^^Bels
>an "innocent"[snicker] senior citizen is about to have many sleepless
> nights
>multiple nay-sayers will suffer "EGG ON FACE"  *ROFL* !
>
> On 10/28/2016 2:30 PM, Jörg-Volker Peetz wrote:
> > Did you take a look at the package pmount?
> > I use it to mount external disks.
> > It requires no changes to /etc/fstab.
>
> Just in case you have not perceived this quiet discrete message:
>   I have not come across pmount before
>   The links I've found so far suggest the original author(s) were thinking of
> *ME*!
>
> In case you haven't got "the drift",
> *THANK YOU*
> I currently suspect this will be the key to resolving MULTIPLE purportedly
> unrelated conundrums :> *YMMV*
>
>
>