interesting, is this a recent thing? i've been a newbie for a few years and when i first read about umask=0 etc. i don't recall this, also i suspect that where plughead and i have been issuing chmod commands that these resulted in 'virtual'? changes, that if i boot into win9xp i would find that some of my mp3s were still marked as 'read only', i say this because i had this behaviour under 8.2, issued chmod -R 0777 * and was able to edit the file tags, yet now under 9.0 some are read only again! i'm going to re read the man pages now but it could be useful for folk searching the archives to clarify this one last point :-)
bascule On Saturday 19 Oct 2002 8:10 pm, J. Grant wrote: > Hi bascule, PlugHead and W. Kasberg, > > PlugHead you are correct, linux "inteligently" maps the limited FAT > readonly/system/hidden/archive to its attempt at the unix equiv. > > Thus "system" is root only, "hidden" is root too (with no read access to > dirs i think) "readonly" does not have read flag for anyone. Or some > variation on this, i forget, i only use fat for legacy stuff now. > > Due to the limited options on fat some of the files will not be mapped > entirely perfectly. This means that winnt, program files etc can only > be viewed by root. > > bascule, if you read man mount & man fstab you will see all the options > you need. > > JG > -- "...[Arthur] leapt to his feet like an author hearing the phone ring..." - Who says that the character of Arthur isn't autobiographical?
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
