I appear to be getting all the email from your forum/discussion group. Like
100's a day.
What is the forum called so that I can try to get it fixed ??
Bryn Jones
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thursday, April 20, 2000 2:22 PM
Subject: RE: [newbie] permissions on DOS_hda1
>Jeepers,
> I came here for info ang get a friggin' soap opera to boot. What a
>discusion group!!!
>At 10:12 AM 4/20/00 -02-30, you wrote:
>>I certainly do not think I am sharper, better, smarter, less destructive
>>than anyone else. That's what I was trying to tell you if you care to
>>listen.
>>
>>You just don't think outside that little bubble you call a life do you?
>>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Mike Corbeil [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>> > Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2000 5:02 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
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> >
>> >
>
>
