[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: vfat mount behavior changed between Psyche and Phoebe



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Sun, 12 Jan 2003 01:00:00 -1000, Warren Togami wrote:

> Psyche mount-2.11r-10.i386.rpm
> [root laptop mnt]# mount -t vfat /dev/hda1 windows/
> [root laptop mnt]# ls -l
> total 16
> drwxr-xr-x    2 root     root         4096 Dec 30 02:00 cdrom
> drwxr-xr-x    2 root     root         4096 Dec 30 23:42 nfs
> drwxr-xr-x   11 root     root         8192 Dec 31  1969 windows
> 
> Phoebe mount-2.11w-2.i386.rpm
> [root laptop mnt]# mount -t vfat /dev/hda1 windows/
> [root laptop mnt]# ls -l
> total 16
> drwxr-xr-x    2 root     root         4096 Dec 30 02:00 cdrom
> drwxr-xr-x    2 root     root         4096 Dec 30 23:42 nfs
> drwxr--r--   11 root     root         8192 Dec 31  1969 windows
> [root laptop mnt]#
> 
> Behavior of mount vfat changed between Psyche and Phoebe.  In all 
> previous versions of Red Hat that I can remember, I was able to easily
> 
> mount my vfat partition containing my MP3 and OGG's and easily read it
> 
> from any user.  I use this vfat partition so I can have my music 
> available while working in either Windows or Linux.
> 
> "-o uid=XXX" is a proper workaround, 

Another proper work-around is "-o umask=022".

If something in util-linux with regard to vfat file access
permissions was changed deliberately, I would expect it to be a
default of "-o umask=077", so by default only "user" could access
the mounted files. But currently it looks like umask=033 is applied.
No idea where it comes from, though. Haven't looked into it.

Btw, when someone touches the util-linux src.rpm, the file
/usr/share/doc/util-linux-2.11w/README.mount could also be moved
into the separate "mount" package.

> but I am concerned that most
> users will not expect this change in vfat mounting behavior.  At first
> I thought XMMS was suddenly unable to browse vfat filesystems, until I
> noticed that the permissions changed.
> 
> Should this behavior change be permanent or reverted back to how it
> was in previous Red Hat?  Does 744 permission ever make sense for a
> directory?
>
> Should I file Bugzilla?

- -- 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+IVPl0iMVcrivHFQRAjR4AJ9Xxaa6f1QOM++yxq4rLVjxiIOqdwCfdFA1
HJoSr8MebL03cJIwYQVB7JE=
=E7ja
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----





[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]