Re: fstab values (was Re: Permissions for vfat mounted drive)
John Stevenson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hello > > On a related matter, can anyone tell me what the numbers actually mean at the > end of each line in the fstab descritpions > > I know that they are labelled and but what does that actually > mean? > > What values should I be using ?? I have just coppied off others examples > previously. > > Thanks. see man 5 fstab -- /*** Running Debian Linux *** * For God so loved the world that He gave his only begotten Son, * * that whoever believes in Him should not perish...John 3:16 * * W. Paul Mills * Topeka, Kansas, U.S.A. * * EMAIL= [EMAIL PROTECTED] * WWW= http://Mills-USA.com/ * * Bill, I was there several years ago, why would I want to go back? * * pgp public key on keyservers everywhere? */
Re: fstab values (was Re: Permissions for vfat mounted drive)
*- John Stevenson wrote about "fstab values (was Re: Permissions for vfat mounted drive)" > Hello > > On a related matter, can anyone tell me what the numbers actually mean at the > end of each line in the fstab descritpions > > I know that they are labelled and but what does that actually > mean? > >From 'man 5 fstab' The fifth field, (fs_freq), is used for these filesystems by the dump(8) command to determine which filesystems need to be dumped. If the fifth field is not present, a value of zero is returned and dump will assume that the filesys tem does not need to be dumped. The sixth field, (fs_passno), is used by the fsck(8) pro gram to determine the order in which filesystem checks are done at reboot time. The root filesystem should be speci fied with a fs_passno of 1, and other filesystems should have a fs_passno of 2. Filesystems within a drive will be checked sequentially, but filesystems on different drives will be checked at the same time to utilize parallelism available in the hardware. If the sixth field is not pre sent or zero, a value of zero is returned and fsck will assume that the filesystem does not need to be checked. > What values should I be using ?? I have just coppied off others examples > previously. > Unless you use dump to backup your system then set the dump field to 0. For passno the above is pretty self explanatory. -- Brian - "Never criticize anybody until you have walked a mile in their shoes, because by that time you will be a mile away and have their shoes." - unknown Mechanical Engineering [EMAIL PROTECTED] Purdue University http://www.ecn.purdue.edu/~servis -
fstab values (was Re: Permissions for vfat mounted drive)
Hello On a related matter, can anyone tell me what the numbers actually mean at the end of each line in the fstab descritpions I know that they are labelled and but what does that actually mean? What values should I be using ?? I have just coppied off others examples previously. Thanks. Rainer Clasen wrote: > Hi! > > John Stevenson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > > Any ideas how I can get no root access to my win98 > > partion, or is it a Fat32 problem. > > I use this in my fstab: > /dev/sda1 /dos/c vfat umask=0002,gid=110,uid=0,showexec 0 2 > > gid 110 is called dosfs, but you may use dos's gid. -- John Stevenson, Objective Alliance: www.oa.nl "Objects are not a technology, they are a state of mind"
Re: Permissions for vfat mounted drive
Hi! John Stevenson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > Any ideas how I can get no root access to my win98 > partion, or is it a Fat32 problem. I use this in my fstab: /dev/sda1 /dos/c vfat umask=0002,gid=110,uid=0,showexec 0 2 gid 110 is called dosfs, but you may use dos's gid. Rainer -- KeyID=58341901 fingerprint=A5 57 04 B3 69 88 A1 FB 78 1D B5 64 E0 BF 72 EB pgppoRzBkiJOG.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Permissions for vfat mounted drive
Pierre-Antoine wrote: > > Leon Breedt wrote: > > > > > You can specify the uid=value, gid=value and umask=value options when > > > mounting, or in /etc/fstab; see mount(8) and fstab(5). > > how can i specify that i don't want any files on the dos partitions to > > have executable permissions? or is that the way the msdosfs filesystem > > handles it? > > once again, using umask=value : > as for chmod (but with inversed value), 0 means rwx (inv of 7) and 1 > means rw- (inv of 6) > umode=137 (rw-r-) might be a good example. A problem with switching off the executable bit I encountered is that normal users cannot enter directories on the partition anymore. Root does not seem to suffer from this problem. Does anyone know why this is so? (I am more surprised that root does not suffer from the problem than that ordinary users do). The simple way to prevent scripts or programs to be executable is to use the `noexec' mount flag. Note however that this provides only limited security. If someone can read a script, (s)he can always execute it explicitly calling the shell: $ bash
Re: Permissions for vfat mounted drive
Hello John Stevenson, > I created a dos group and tried to assign the win98 > partition as belonging to the dos group, but this did ... > Any ideas how I can get no root access to my win98 > partion, or is it a Fat32 problem. You need to give it a couple of options when you are mounting it. If you are mounting from fstab, these go into the fourth column (which probably says "default" now). Otherwise, use the -o switch. Try something like "gid=123,umask=002", which means "give full access to owner and group 123, read/execute to others". Check the mount manpage for more details. > P.s. I realise that some people would consider none > root access to the dos/win partion a security hole, but > I am aware of this, thanks. That's OK, mine's like that too... Jiri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: Permissions for vfat mounted drive
On Wed, 18 Nov 1998, J.H.M. Dassen (Ray) wrote: > On Wed, Nov 18, 1998 at 15:35:55 +0200, Leon Breedt wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 18 1998, J.H.M. Dassen Ray" spake thus: > > > You can specify the uid=value, gid=value and umask=value options when > > > mounting, or in /etc/fstab; see mount(8) and fstab(5). > > > > how can i specify that i don't want any files on the dos partitions to > > have executable permissions? > > Use an appropriate value for umask (sorry, I don't have a suitable value > handy). > > Ray > -- > UNFAIR Term applied to advantages enjoyed by other people which we tried > to cheat them out of and didn't manage. See also DISHONESTY, SNEAKY, > UNDERHAND and JUST LUCKY I GUESS. > - The Hipcrime Vocab by Chad C. Mulligan > > > -- > Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null > > What about to write noexec in the options field?
Re: Permissions for vfat mounted drive
Leon Breedt wrote: > > > You can specify the uid=value, gid=value and umask=value options when > > mounting, or in /etc/fstab; see mount(8) and fstab(5). > how can i specify that i don't want any files on the dos partitions to > have executable permissions? or is that the way the msdosfs filesystem > handles it? once again, using umask=value : as for chmod (but with inversed value), 0 means rwx (inv of 7) and 1 means rw- (inv of 6) umode=137 (rw-r-) might be a good example. Pierre-Antoine
Re: Permissions for vfat mounted drive
On Wed, Nov 18, 1998 at 15:35:55 +0200, Leon Breedt wrote: > On Wed, Nov 18 1998, J.H.M. Dassen Ray" spake thus: > > You can specify the uid=value, gid=value and umask=value options when > > mounting, or in /etc/fstab; see mount(8) and fstab(5). > > how can i specify that i don't want any files on the dos partitions to > have executable permissions? Use an appropriate value for umask (sorry, I don't have a suitable value handy). Ray -- UNFAIR Term applied to advantages enjoyed by other people which we tried to cheat them out of and didn't manage. See also DISHONESTY, SNEAKY, UNDERHAND and JUST LUCKY I GUESS. - The Hipcrime Vocab by Chad C. Mulligan
Re: Permissions for vfat mounted drive
On Wed, Nov 18 1998, J.H.M. Dassen Ray" spake thus: > You can specify the uid=value, gid=value and umask=value options when > mounting, or in /etc/fstab; see mount(8) and fstab(5). how can i specify that i don't want any files on the dos partitions to have executable permissions? or is that the way the msdosfs filesystem handles it? regards, leon -- Leon Breedt | Codewarrior | Debian 2.0 | Linux 2.1.128 PGP key and homepage at http://ejb.www.icon.co.za Linux: Because I want to get there *today*
Re: Permissions for vfat mounted drive
On Wed, Nov 18, 1998 at 13:06:22 +0100, John Stevenson wrote: [how to have user write access to a DOS/windows partition] You can specify the uid=value, gid=value and umask=value options when mounting, or in /etc/fstab; see mount(8) and fstab(5). HTH, Ray -- Obsig: developing a new sig
Re: Permissions for vfat mounted drive
John Stevenson wrote: > I created a dos group and tried to assign the win98 > partition as belonging to the dos group, but this did > not work, only assigning the mount point to dos and not > the file hierachy underneath that mount point. I even > tried to chmod it, but no luck. I solved this at home, so I don't have my fstab available right now :) but anyway I used the -o option of 'mount' to force the vfat fs to belong to the 'dos' goup, (sth like gid=95 i think) and also to force the permission mask of all files. Warning : this is the INVERSE mask, so 007 grants rwx to user and group, and nothing to others. > Any ideas how I can get no root access to my win98 > partion, or is it a Fat32 problem. nope hope this'll help Pierre-Antoine
Permissions for vfat mounted drive
Hello Debian Land, I have a question about access permissions. I can access my vfat mounted windows98 partition as any user, however I can only get write access when I am root. My linux and win98 partitions are on the same harddrive. I used to be able to get the desired access by adding users to the dos group when I was using debian 1.3.1, but this dos group was not a default creation when I installed debian 2.0. I created a dos group and tried to assign the win98 partition as belonging to the dos group, but this did not work, only assigning the mount point to dos and not the file hierachy underneath that mount point. I even tried to chmod it, but no luck. Any ideas how I can get no root access to my win98 partion, or is it a Fat32 problem. P.s. I realise that some people would consider none root access to the dos/win partion a security hole, but I am aware of this, thanks. -- John Stevenson, Objective Alliance: www.oa.nl "Objects are not a technology, they are a state of mind"
