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
bit to get into if someone wants to use more than just
linux. I have seen people be burned by this when using linux habits on
other systems. It's a real mess because it can't be fixed on an active
system. (You can't change the permissions on the underlying directory
without unmounting the overlying filesystem.)
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 outdated, or somehow not rel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, t
> 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 t
ks.
>
> Ok, I did as adviced. Changed permissions and ownerships after mount, then
> rebooted and it loks like it worked.
>
> Just for understanding: What does this procedure affect? Does ist set the
> ownerships to this device or does it somehow let the kernel remember or is
> t
On Fri, Jul 11, 2025 at 08:19:47PM +0200, Hans wrote:
Just for understanding: What does this procedure affect? Does ist set the
ownerships to this device or does it somehow let the kernel remember or is
this owneship stored somewher else?
Permissions are stored for the root directory of each
On 7/11/25 20:02, Hans wrote:
Where are the permission be set at the drive? It is just a hardware without
any folders or files on. Freshly formatted. What can be done wrong at this?
Nothing is wrong. After a fresh format (mke2fs) the root directory
belongs to root:root, and that is what you se
> You have to chown/chmod the mount point *after* the drive is mounted. If
> you do it before the drive is mounted it won't have any effect on the
> mounted drive. (As you can see.) I really am not sure what else to say,
> this is how it works.
Ok, I did as adviced. Change
xr-x 3 root root4096 11. Jul 16:30 daten2
> drwxrwx--- 12 root backup 4096 25. Jun 21:37 space
Ok, so you've not yet set ownership or permissions on the filesystem
mounted at 'daten2'
>
> But when I unmount sde1 it looks like this:
>
> drwxrwx--- 2 r
d is the proper procedure, set the permissions after
the drive is mounted.
I do NOT want to remount it manually at every boot.
That has nothing to do with the permissions.
A mount point is just a directory that has its own permissions, then you
mount something on it and it has the permissions
e you are probably confused and did something different with the
> one that is different.
>
Yes, agreed, but WHAT?
> A mount point is just a directory that has its own permissions, then you
> mount something on it and it has the permissions of whatever you
> mounted. So there are tw
On Fri, Jul 11, 2025 at 07:29:15PM +0200, Hans wrote:
This is not, what I wanted. The questions are:
1. Why does this happen only with one of the 3 drives?
You probably set the permissions on the other two drives after they were
mounted.
A mount point is just a directory that has its own permissions, then you
mount something on it and it has the permissions of whatever you
mounted. So there are two sets of permissions to consider for each one:
before mounting and after.
> 2. What did I do wrong with this drive?
You have simply
> The ownership of the underlying mount point is ignored (and should
> generally be set to root:root mode 755 to avoid possible complications
> in odd cases). You need to chown the directory *after* it is mounted.
This is not, what I wanted. The questions are:
1. Why does this happen only with o
On Fri, Jul 11, 2025 at 07:06:19PM +0200, Hans wrote:
So all are the same, and the mountpoints shall all have
ownership user:group = root:backup
However, the latest harddrive I added, wbhich is sde1 shows wrong ownerhips,
The ownership of the underlying mount point is ignored (and should
ge
Dear list,
I am struggeling with a strange behavior when automounting my inbuilt
harddrives.
I have 3 harddrives, which are mounted to
/space (sdc1) ext4
/daten1 (sdd1) ext4
/daten2 (sde1) ext4
So all are the same, and the mountpoints shall all have
ownership user:group = r
On Fri, 2025-03-07 at 21:44 -0500, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
> It is not clear to me why you want vsnyder:adm, and why you want the
> world to have access to anything.
>
> Here's how I set up permissions on Apache. It is part of my hardened
> system.
>
> # Root owns ev
On Sat, Mar 08, 2025 at 17:14:44 -0800, Van Snyder wrote:
> I want to be able to change the web without logging in as root. I
> occasionally need to send files to recipients that are big enough
> suffocate their mail readers. Putting a soft link to it in /opt/www
> without hooking it to my index is
On Fri, Mar 07, 2025 at 02:43:01PM -0800, Van Snyder wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 07, 2025 at 11:10:48AM -0800, Van Snyder wrote:
> > I have two computers, both running Debian 12.5 with kernel 6.1.0-31-
> > amd64
> >
> > Both are running Apache/2.4.62 (Debian), Server built: 2024-10-
> > 04T15:21:08
> >
achines, the directories' modes are all 755, and the
> files' modes are all 644.
>
> Web pages display on one, but not the other. /var/log/apache2/access.log and
> /var/log/apache2/error.log show 403 errors on GET lines.
>
> Online pages about this say "che
On Fri, Mar 7, 2025 at 8:47 PM Van Snyder wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2025-03-07 at 14:29 -0800, Van Snyder wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2025-03-07 at 20:44 +0100, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
>
> Somewhere there should be a DocumentRoot which you might want to
> adjust accordingly.
>
>
> There is no DocumentRoot setting
On Fri, 2025-03-07 at 14:29 -0800, Van Snyder wrote:
> On Fri, 2025-03-07 at 20:44 +0100, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> > Somewhere there should be a DocumentRoot which you might want to
> > adjust accordingly.
>
> There is no DocumentRoot setting in the /etc/apache2/apache2.conf on
> either machine.
On Fri, 2025-03-07 at 20:44 +0100, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> Both have web pages in /opt/www, not /var/www, so they don't
> disappear
> > when I re-install.
>
> They shouldn't, but I don't know how you "re-install",
When I reinstall, I reformat / and /boot, and /var isn't in a separate
partition,
On Fri, Mar 07, 2025 at 11:10:48AM -0800, Van Snyder wrote:
> I have two computers, both running Debian 12.5 with kernel 6.1.0-31-
> amd64
>
> Both are running Apache/2.4.62 (Debian), Server built: 2024-10-
> 04T15:21:08
>
> Both machines show one "/usr/sbin/apache2 -k start" process owned by
> r
On Fri, 2025-03-07 at 20:44 +0100, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> Somewhere there should be a DocumentRoot which you might want to
> adjust accordingly.
There is no DocumentRoot setting in the /etc/apache2/apache2.conf on
either machine. One works, the other doesn't.
On both machines, ServerRoot is co
are the same on both machines.
Same.
> In /opt/www on both machines, all of the files and directories are
> owned by vsnyder:adm
This is not very typical. In any case, the web server, running as
www-data, should have read access to those files. If you want to
keep the ownerships as above
ines.
Online pages about this say "check the permissions" and "make sure the
files are owned by a uid with root access."
Any ideas?
On 23 Jul 2024 14:49 -0300, from edua...@kalinowski.com.br (Eduardo M
KALINOWSKI):
> As described on the sshfs manpage, by default only the mounting user (root,
> in your case) can access the filesystem.
>
> You can use -o allow_other to allow other users. Or, if it's only eben
> that'll be acces
On 23/07/2024 14:40, Eben King wrote:
And after I issue this command:
root@cerberus:~# sshfs -o default_permissions
sshd@white_mycloud:/mnt/HD/HD_a2/Public /mnt/white_mycloud/
sshd@white_mycloud's password:
By the prompt (and the behavior below) I assume you're mounting as root.
it looks like
I have an older WD Mycloud Connect NAS. I'm currently trying to mount it
via sshfs (I prefer NFS, but can't make it work either). When it's not
mounted, /mnt looks like this to me:
eben@cerberus:~$ \ls -l /mnt
total 16
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Mar 11 23:39 server
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096
Joe Pfeiffer writes:
> I have a laptop with a recent Debian install, which seems to have
> incorrect permissions on /dev/tty
>
> crw--w 1 root tty 5, 0 Feb 16 08:51 /dev/tty
Ah, found it. I somehow had a
/etc/systemd/system/getty.target.wants/getty@tty.service
file.
Foun
I have a laptop with a recent Debian install, which seems to have
incorrect permissions on /dev/tty
crw--w 1 root tty 5, 0 Feb 16 08:51 /dev/tty
/lib/udev/rules.d/50-udev-default.rules contains the usual
SUBSYSTEM=="tty", KERNEL=="tty", GROUP="tty", MODE="
On Sun 04 Jun 2023 at 11:59:21 (-0400), ce wrote:
> I have a mountpoint where all files under it have a group `fuse`.
>
> This is strange to me.
>
> As far as I can remember, Ubuntu doesn't do this.
Is this a system that's been around since wheezy? Up until then,
Debian had a system group called
I think you have a partition with filesystem btrfs that uses compression
with lzop.
Perhaps inside of it you have a file that is a compressed filesystem (that
is fuse: *Filesystem in Userspace* )
what can you see when you type in
$ cd /mnt/part2
$ ls -la
El lun, 5 jun 2023 a las 6:32, ce () escr
On 6/5/23 7:23 AM, Greg Wooledge wrote:
>
> You can run the command "mount" with no arguments to see the details of
> each mounted file system. You don't even have to be root. I don't know
> how btrfs subvolumes work, so I don't know whether they appear in the
> output of mount, but you could
On Sun, Jun 04, 2023 at 11:00:18PM -0400, ce wrote:
> On 6/4/23 5:46 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> > What kind of hardware is this file system on?
> >
> > What kind of file system is it?
> >
> > How did you mount it? (Show the command you used, and any output that
> > it produced.)
> >
> > What does
On 6/4/23 5:46 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 04, 2023 at 11:59:21AM -0400, ce wrote:
> > I have a mountpoint where all files under it have a group `fuse`.
>
> You need to provide details, or else nobody can help you with anything.
>
> What kind of hardware is this file system on?
>
> Wh
On Sun, Jun 04, 2023 at 11:59:21AM -0400, ce wrote:
> I have a mountpoint where all files under it have a group `fuse`.
You need to provide details, or else nobody can help you with anything.
What kind of hardware is this file system on?
What kind of file system is it?
How did you mount it? (S
I have a mountpoint where all files under it have a group `fuse`.
This is strange to me.
As far as I can remember, Ubuntu doesn't do this.
Hi to Everyone,
My old Debian Stretch having crashed after last update, I installed
Bullseye. Most things operate OK after re-installing,
except so far: 'gphoto2' and my Epson Scanner Perfection v500.
I have re-installed the scanner using :
epsonscan2_6.7.43.0-1_amd64.deb and
epsonscan2_non-fre
libvirt-qemu, but the plain old libvirt user needs to access
it too? That's the only thing I can think of, since root ignores
permissions anyway.
I did try to `su` into the libvirt-qemu user, and the path was reachable
via the full absolute path. I could create, modify, read, and delete
f
On Sat, 14 May 2022 at 10:57, Matt Ventura wrote:
> On one box (Debian 11.3), my virt-install script works fine:
> virt-install [...]
> However, on another box, the same command (minus the final --network option)
> gives me this:
[...]
> Could not open '/var/lib/libvirt/qemu/nvram/openwisp_VARS
Hi,
On one box (Debian 11.3), my virt-install script works fine:
virt-install --virt-type kvm --name $NEWVM
--locationhttp://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/dists/bullseye/main/installer-amd64
--extra-args "netcfg/hostname=$NEWVM" -v \
--os-variant debian11 --disk
size=30,pool=vmvol,bus=scsi,disca
the file's creator. This might work. I haven't tested it yet.
>
> It works, but it's a pain to setup, because it still needs umask 002 for
> all users and there are so many places to change the umask.
>
> This might sound like heresy, but depending on your storage an
On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 04:06:10PM +0300, Reco wrote:
> Hi.
>
> On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 01:59:58PM +0200, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 12:27:56PM +0300, Reco wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > FUSE = slow + CPU wastage
> > >
> > > Using a filesystem the way it was inten
Hello,
On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 04:06:10PM +0300, Reco wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 01:59:58PM +0200, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> > Back then you could more or less safely assume that a file system
> > image wasn't out to kill you. These days, though...
>
> Oh. Citation needed. Curious minds wan
Hi.
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 11:09:41PM -0400, Paul M. Foster wrote:
> > > > > Without setting directory and file permissions to 777, how do you
> > > > > allow the above? What combinations of groups, direc
Hi.
On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 01:59:58PM +0200, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 12:27:56PM +0300, Reco wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > FUSE = slow + CPU wastage
> >
> > Using a filesystem the way it was intended is much cleaner solution.
>
> On the flip side, using an in-kernel
On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 12:27:56PM +0300, Reco wrote:
[...]
> FUSE = slow + CPU wastage
>
> Using a filesystem the way it was intended is much cleaner solution.
On the flip side, using an in-kernel file system is running code
in kernel space which was conceived and written in happier times.
Ba
On 9/24/21 11:27 AM, Reco wrote:
Hi.
On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 10:22:00AM +0200, Alex Mestiashvili wrote:
On 9/22/21 8:53 AM, Reco wrote:
Hi.
On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 11:09:41PM -0400, Paul M. Foster wrote:
Without setting directory and file permissions to 777, how do you
Hi.
On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 10:22:00AM +0200, Alex Mestiashvili wrote:
> On 9/22/21 8:53 AM, Reco wrote:
> > Hi.
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 11:09:41PM -0400, Paul M. Foster wrote:
> > > Without setting directory and file permissions to 777, how do y
On 9/22/21 8:53 AM, Reco wrote:
Hi.
On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 11:09:41PM -0400, Paul M. Foster wrote:
Without setting directory and file permissions to 777, how do you
allow the above? What combinations of groups, directory
owners/permissions and file owners/permissions might make this
ar/www/html/website.
>
> Without setting directory and file permissions to 777, how do you
> allow the above? What combinations of groups, directory
> owners/permissions and file owners/permissions might make this
> possible?
>
> Paul
This situation is exactly what version control systems, especially like
svn and git, were created to handle.
On Wed, 22 Sep 2021, Paul M. Foster wrote:
This is more or less the solution I tried. However, when a user creates a
file on this system, the permissions are (for example) paulf:paulf. This
means that, despite the directory permissions, other users won't be able to
modify the file nor
"Paul M. Foster" writes:
> However, as I said, this type of situation had to be common on old
> Unix systems, and they didn't have git. They had to have solved it
> some other way.
For me in the 90s the solution was what's mentioned. Group, permissions
and setgid
Hi.
On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 11:09:41PM -0400, Paul M. Foster wrote:
> Without setting directory and file permissions to 777, how do you
> allow the above? What combinations of groups, directory
> owners/permissions and file owners/permissions might make this
> possible?
Sol
On Mi, 22 sep 21, 00:15:48, Paul M. Foster wrote:
>
> On 9/21/21 11:42 PM, Georgi Naplatanov wrote:
> >
> > you can create a user group, add all developers to it and give this
> > group permissions to read and write to that particular folder
> > (/var/www/html/we
ix
>>> university systems. (Users might be accessing files via Samba, NFS, or
>>> locally.)
>>>
>>> Just to make this more concrete, assume the development tree is in
>>> /var/www/html/website.
>>>
>>> Without setting directory and file permi
Paul M. Foster composed on 2021-09-22 00:10 (UTC-0400):
> However, as I said, this type of situation had to be common on old Unix
> systems, and they didn't have git. They had to have solved it some other
> way.
On 9/21/21 9:10 PM, Paul M. Foster wrote:
Yeah, I use git in other contexts. In this particular instance, when
these projects were created, git didn't exist. While I could implement
it here, the other user is on a Mac. I've had experience trying to
install "normal" software (like git) on a Mac
/html/website.
Without setting directory and file permissions to 777, how do you allow
the above? What combinations of groups, directory owners/permissions and
file owners/permissions might make this possible?
Hi Paul,
you can create a user group, add all developers to it and give this
group permis
On 9/21/21 11:26 PM, Charles Curley wrote:
On Tue, 21 Sep 2021 23:09:41 -0400
"Paul M. Foster" wrote:
Say you have a directory in which there are development files. A
number of users will be creating, deleting and modifying the files
there. This is the type of situation which might have been
On Tue, 21 Sep 2021 23:09:41 -0400
"Paul M. Foster" wrote:
> Say you have a directory in which there are development files. A
> number of users will be creating, deleting and modifying the files
> there. This is the type of situation which might have been common on
> old Unix university systems.
in
> /var/www/html/website.
>
> Without setting directory and file permissions to 777, how do you allow
> the above? What combinations of groups, directory owners/permissions and
> file owners/permissions might make this possible?
>
Hi Paul,
you can create a user group, add all d
pe of situation which might have been common on old Unix
university systems. (Users might be accessing files via Samba, NFS, or
locally.)
Just to make this more concrete, assume the development tree is in
/var/www/html/website.
Without setting directory and file permissions to 777, how do you
On Sat 28 Aug 2021 at 15:38:40 -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 28, 2021 at 08:31:56PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> > Nobody should be logging into the web interface as root.
>
> As far as "nobody should...", I don't see the harm. It's not like the
> password is going over a network cable (or
On Sat, Aug 28, 2021 at 08:31:56PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> Nobody should be logging into the web interface as root.
As far as "nobody should...", I don't see the harm. It's not like the
password is going over a network cable (or wireless EM). It's just
loopback.
Also note the official instruction
On Sat 28 Aug 2021 at 07:11:55 -0700, Peter Ehlert wrote:
>
> On 8/26/21 5:53 AM, Greg Wooledge wrote:
[...]
> > 2) Install cups.
> * cups was not installed by default. The Brother installer did flag that
> first off, easily corrected
A print queue was installed by Sun 22 Aug 2021 05:44:11 AM
On 8/26/21 5:53 AM, Greg Wooledge wrote:
On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 01:37:49PM +0100, Brian wrote:
On Thu 26 Aug 2021 at 13:23:58 +0100, mick crane wrote:
On 2021-08-26 12:59, Peter Ehlert wrote:
On 8/25/21 12:11 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote:
Some people report restarting the browser is enough. S
On 8/26/21 5:53 AM, Greg Wooledge wrote:
On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 01:37:49PM +0100, Brian wrote:
On Thu 26 Aug 2021 at 13:23:58 +0100, mick crane wrote:
On 2021-08-26 12:59, Peter Ehlert wrote:
On 8/25/21 12:11 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote:
Some people report restarting the browser is enough. So
On 2021-08-26 13:53, Greg Wooledge wrote:
I suspect there's some *really* basic misunderstanding going on at some
level.
*busted*
It's like if I don't know everything I know nothing.
=O)
mick
--
Key ID4BFEBB31
On Thu 26 Aug 2021 at 16:48:14 +, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
[...]
> _DON'T_ edit groups / shadow password files by hand unless really, absolutely
> necessary - the potential for mistakes is too high.
I suppose finding the line with lpadmin in it and editing it is prone
to mistakes. Heaven
On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 02:26:54PM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 08:16:23PM +0200, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 06:24:01PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> > > On Thu 26 Aug 2021 at 11:31:30 -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 04:25
On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 08:16:23PM +0200, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 06:24:01PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> > On Thu 26 Aug 2021 at 11:31:30 -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 04:25:54PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > > I also forgot: afte
On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 06:24:01PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> On Thu 26 Aug 2021 at 11:31:30 -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 04:25:54PM +0100, Brian wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > > I also forgot: after carrying out the corrected procedure, log out and
> > > log back in.
> >
> > Th
On Thu 26 Aug 2021 at 11:31:30 -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 04:25:54PM +0100, Brian wrote:
[...]
> > I also forgot: after carrying out the corrected procedure, log out and
> > log back in.
>
> This is the part that I don't quite understand. How does that matter?
The s
On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 11:31:30AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 04:25:54PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> > On Thu 26 Aug 2021 at 10:56:55 -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 03:49:23PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> > > > On Thu 26 Aug 2021 at 06:18:21 -0700, Pete
On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 04:25:54PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> On Thu 26 Aug 2021 at 10:56:55 -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 03:49:23PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> > > On Thu 26 Aug 2021 at 06:18:21 -0700, Peter Ehlert wrote:
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > > > It would be useful to
On Thu 26 Aug 2021 at 10:56:55 -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 03:49:23PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> > On Thu 26 Aug 2021 at 06:18:21 -0700, Peter Ehlert wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > > It would be useful to have the outputs of
> > > >
> > > >groups
> > > $ groups
> > > pe
On Thu 26 Aug 2021 at 10:56:55 -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 03:49:23PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> > On Thu 26 Aug 2021 at 06:18:21 -0700, Peter Ehlert wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > > It would be useful to have the outputs of
> > > >
> > > >groups
> > > $ groups
> > > pe
On Thu 26 Aug 2021 at 08:53:19 -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
[...]
> I suspect there's some *really* basic misunderstanding going on at some
> level. Let's start from the beginning.
>
> In order to administer a printer in CUPS, you do the following things:
>
>
> 1) Make sure the root account ha
On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 03:49:23PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> On Thu 26 Aug 2021 at 06:18:21 -0700, Peter Ehlert wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > > It would be useful to have the outputs of
> > >
> > >groups
> > $ groups
> > peter cdrom floppy audio dip video plugdev netdev
> > >
> > > and
> > >
> > >
On Thu 26 Aug 2021 at 06:18:21 -0700, Peter Ehlert wrote:
[...]
> > It would be useful to have the outputs of
> >
> >groups
> $ groups
> peter cdrom floppy audio dip video plugdev netdev
> >
> > and
> >
> >grep SystemGroup /etc/cups/cups-files.conf
> $ grep SystemGroup /etc/cups/cups-f
On 8/26/21 5:07 AM, Brian wrote:
On Thu 26 Aug 2021 at 09:16:31 +1000, Keith Bainbridge wrote:
On 25/8/21 22:40, Peter Ehlert wrote:
CUPS permissions
when I go to http://localhost:631/admin the dashboard is displayed as
expected.
Manage Printers does display my MFCL3770CDW and I am
On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 01:37:49PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> On Thu 26 Aug 2021 at 13:23:58 +0100, mick crane wrote:
>
> > On 2021-08-26 12:59, Peter Ehlert wrote:
> > > On 8/25/21 12:11 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> >
> > > > Some people report restarting the browser is enough. Some claim they
> > > >
On Thu, 26 Aug 2021 04:59:42 -0700
Peter Ehlert wrote:
> thanks. restarting firefox worked.
> I got the login dialog box
>
> after login as (user)
> Add Printer gives> Unable to add printer: Forbidden
>
> back to square one
Try logging in as root.
--
Does anybody read signatures any more?
h
On Thu 26 Aug 2021 at 13:23:58 +0100, mick crane wrote:
> On 2021-08-26 12:59, Peter Ehlert wrote:
> > On 8/25/21 12:11 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote:
>
> > > Some people report restarting the browser is enough. Some claim they
> > > have to reboot. Who knows.
> > >
> > thanks. restarting firefox wo
On 26/08/2021 08:59, Peter Ehlert wrote:
thanks. restarting firefox worked.
I got the login dialog box
after login as (user)
Add Printer gives> Unable to add printer: Forbidden
back to square one
Users don't ordinarily have permission to add printers, you should login
as root.
It's possibl
On 2021-08-26 12:59, Peter Ehlert wrote:
On 8/25/21 12:11 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote:
Some people report restarting the browser is enough. Some claim they
have to reboot. Who knows.
thanks. restarting firefox worked.
I got the login dialog box
after login as (user)
Add Printer gives> Unable
On Thu, 2021-08-26 at 04:59 -0700, Peter Ehlert wrote:
[...]
>
> thanks. restarting firefox worked.
> I got the login dialog box
>
> after login as (user)
> Add Printer gives> Unable to add printer: Forbidden
>
> back to square one
>
I think the authentication dialog box uses javascript, you d
On Thu 26 Aug 2021 at 09:16:31 +1000, Keith Bainbridge wrote:
> On 25/8/21 22:40, Peter Ehlert wrote:
> > CUPS permissions
> >
> > when I go to http://localhost:631/admin the dashboard is displayed as
> > expected.
> >
> > Manage Printers does display my
On 8/25/21 12:11 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote:
On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 11:47:33AM -0700, Peter Ehlert wrote:
On 8/25/21 9:27 AM, Henning Follmann wrote:
On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 05:40:36AM -0700, Peter Ehlert wrote:
CUPS permissions
when I go to http://localhost:631/admin the dashboard is
On 25/8/21 22:40, Peter Ehlert wrote:
CUPS permissions
when I go to http://localhost:631/admin the dashboard is displayed as
expected.
Manage Printers does display my MFCL3770CDW and I am (apparently) able
to manage and edit the settings.
however
Add Printer gives> Unable to add prin
On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 11:47:33AM -0700, Peter Ehlert wrote:
>
> On 8/25/21 9:27 AM, Henning Follmann wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 05:40:36AM -0700, Peter Ehlert wrote:
> > > CUPS permissions
> > >
> > > when I go to http://localhost:631/admin the d
On 8/25/21 9:27 AM, Henning Follmann wrote:
On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 05:40:36AM -0700, Peter Ehlert wrote:
CUPS permissions
when I go to http://localhost:631/admin the dashboard is displayed as
expected.
Manage Printers does display my MFCL3770CDW and I am (apparently) able to
manage and
On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 05:40:36AM -0700, Peter Ehlert wrote:
> CUPS permissions
>
> when I go to http://localhost:631/admin the dashboard is displayed as
> expected.
>
> Manage Printers does display my MFCL3770CDW and I am (apparently) able to
> manage and edit the setting
CUPS permissions
when I go to http://localhost:631/admin the dashboard is displayed as
expected.
Manage Printers does display my MFCL3770CDW and I am (apparently) able
to manage and edit the settings.
however
Add Printer gives> Unable to add printer: Forbidden
is this normal behavior
Hi,
virtual private message to John Conover:
I answered to your private mail of 1 Jun 2021 12:51:26 -0700.
But my mail provider's server reports that your mail provider's server
refuses to take it:
From: GMX Mailer Daemon
...
cono...@rahul.net:
SMTP error from remote server for TEXT com
Hi,
John Conover wrote:
> Odd, root can not access the /run/user/601/ directory, but the user
> can
This is said to be a fuse filesystem feature. See e.g.
https://superuser.com/questions/169977/mount-point-permission-denied
> dr-x-- 2 theuser users 0 Dec 31 1969 doc/
> Odd tim
1 - 100 of 2170 matches
Mail list logo
