On Sat 12 Jul 2025 at 02:51:25 (+), David wrote:
> Again: when you mount something on a mountpoint, all underlying data of
> that mountpoint becomes hidden and inaccessible and irrelevant.
In linux, that isn't entirely true, as you can use a bind mount
to read what lies "underneath". (I haven
On Sat, Jul 12, 2025 at 02:51:25AM +, David wrote:
In fact it has been my practice for some years now to 'chown root:' and
'chmod 0' on all my mountpoints and set the immutable bit on them, to avoid
accidentally writing into directories that are intended only as
mountpoints.
And I have never
David wrote:
> Something that I am curious to learn more about, if anyone has ideas, is
> the discussion at the above link about the need to have at least 'chmod
> 111' on mountpoint directories.
>
> I have not found that necessary, and so I wonder if that advice is
> outdated, or somehow not rel
On Fri, 11 Jul 2025 at 18:49, Hans wrote:
> > Permissions are stored for the root directory of each filesystem, which
> > are used as the permissions of the mount point when the drive is
> > mounted.
> Thanks, this is explaining all my questions. I always thought wrong, that
> mounted devices an
> Permissions are stored for the root directory of each filesystem, which
> are used as the permissions of the mount point when the drive is
> mounted.
Thanks, this is explaining all my questions. I always thought wrong, that
mounted devices and folders on it, get the ownership from the folder, i
5 matches
Mail list logo
