At 09:52 AM 7/5/00 -0700, you wrote:
>Larrydon't forget the fact that the dos filesystem doesn't
>maintain the Linux permissions of the files stored on it.
>You'll have to re-set the permissions after retrieving the
>file from the dos formatted floppy.
Good point but it would seem an odd circ
Larrydon't forget the fact that the dos filesystem doesn't
maintain the Linux permissions of the files stored on it.
You'll have to re-set the permissions after retrieving the
file from the dos formatted floppy.
Alan
Larry Marshall wrote:
>
> > Yeah, I was implying that. I was also
> Yeah, I was implying that. I was also implying that dos is a
>better file system to use on floppies, it's more stable, especially
>over 1440k, and universally more readable by most systems.
Thanks for the response Tom. If I ever use a floppy it'll be as a DOS
floppy :-)
Cheers --- Lar
On Wed, 05 Jul 2000, you wrote:
> >Not really. Any files you use with Linux and be copied to or
> >read from a DOS formatted floppy. Where this gets flakey is tryin
> >to do it with ext2 formatted floppies. If you use 'superformat'
> >to format floppies beyond 1440k (eg, 1992), you need to u
>Not really. Any files you use with Linux and be copied to or
>read from a DOS formatted floppy. Where this gets flakey is tryin
>to do it with ext2 formatted floppies. If you use 'superformat'
>to format floppies beyond 1440k (eg, 1992), you need to use DOS
>format.
In the several years t
On Tue, 04 Jul 2000, you wrote:
> >Second that. I guess "supermount" is another of those
> >bright ideas not yet ready for prime time. I have used
> >Linux (SuSE and Debian) before and have several ext2
>
> Most versions of UNIX have an automounter. It sounds like they've put this
> one toget
Billno dangers that I'm aware of. Through
experimentation, since documentation is all but non-existant,
I found that supermount works fine on dos formatted floppies.
But if you want to read/write an ext2 floppy then you need to
do it the traditional Linux way which includes umounting the
f
Alan - I asked several days ago if there is any dangers in using supermount and was
assured that there isn't any danger (at least for a single-user system).
Would you please explain why you say we should mount/umount the "old way"?
I'm using ext2 files.
thanks
Bill
On Tue, 04 Jul 2000, Alan Shoe
My /etc/fstab reads:
/mnt/floppy/ supermount fs=ext2,noauto,dev=/dev/fd0 0 0
I set the noauto as I prefer this.
I still must mount the floppy as root.
Bill
On Tue, 04 Jul 2000, you wrote:
> I cannot mount floppies using supermount. My /etc/fstab
> reads:
> /dev/hda1 /mnt/DOS_hda1 vfat user,ex
Phildon't change the fstab entry. Supermount only works
for dos formatted floppies. Mount ext2 floppies the old
fashioned way and don't forget to umount them before removal.
Alan
Phil Burton wrote:
>
> I cannot mount floppies using supermount. My /etc/fstab
> reads:
> /dev/hda1 /mnt/DOS
I cannot mount floppies using supermount. My /etc/fstab
reads:
/dev/hda1 /mnt/DOS_hda1 vfat user,exec,conv=binary 0 0
/dev/hda2 / ext2 defaults 1 1
/dev/hda3 swap swap defaults 0 0
/dev/hda4 /home ext2 defaults 1 2
none /proc proc defaults 0 0
none /dev/pts devpts mode=0620 0 0
/mnt/cdrom /mnt/c
11 matches
Mail list logo
