Bug#447565: Acknowledgement (/usr/share/hal/fdi/policy/10osvendor/20-storage-methods.fdi: Please include showexec in list of allowed options)
Michal Čihař schrieb: Well I meant for vfat filesystem on Linux, just to make it clear. Could you give more reasons, why this should be done and if it has any downsides? I have never used this option before. Michael -- Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the universe are pointed away from Earth? signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#447565: Acknowledgement (/usr/share/hal/fdi/policy/10osvendor/20-storage-methods.fdi: Please include showexec in list of allowed options)
Well I meant for vfat filesystem on Linux, just to make it clear. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#447565: Acknowledgement (/usr/share/hal/fdi/policy/10osvendor/20-storage-methods.fdi: Please include showexec in list of allowed options)
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 10:18:51 +0200 Michael Biebl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Michal Čihař schrieb: Well I meant for vfat filesystem on Linux, just to make it clear. Could you give more reasons, why this should be done and if it has any downsides? I have never used this option before. I just use it as easiest way to get rid executable flag on all files on vfat while keeping binaries executable so that they can be started using wine (via binfmt_misc). Is there any reason why frontend should limit options which can be passed through it to mount? -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
