Re: still fighting for normality

On Sat, Jan 16, 1999 at 06:51:11PM +0100, Paolo Pedaletti wrote: > /dev/hdc5 /mnt/E vfatrw,conv=auto,user,exec,noauto,async,umask=000 > 0 0 Urg, permanent mounts under /mnt, and subdirectories too. Red Hat be damned. > before or later I will change the umask to a more secure one. > Bu

Re: still fighting for normality

On Sat, Jan 16, 1999 at 03:27:55PM +, Rich Harran. wrote: > rwx for group), but this doesn't work, and I can't even chmod the > permissions as root. If I type > > chmod --verbose g+w /mnt > it claims to have changed the permissions, but doesn't actually. the vfat filesystem doesn't s

Re: still fighting for normality

Ciao Rich, On Saturday 16 January 1999, alle 15:27:55 +, Rich Harran. wrote: > I found an old thread on this, and now have: > > /dev/hda1 /mnt vfat unmask=0002,gid=101,uid=0,showexec 0 2 > > in fstab, (where 101 is dos gid). However, the drive mounts with > permissions: > > drwxr_xr_x h

Re: still fighting for normality

On Sat, Jan 16, 1999 at 03:27:55PM +, Rich Harran. wrote: > I've been trying to get a dos partition mounted in group 'dos', with > read-write permissions for those in this group. I found an old thread on > this, and now have: > > /dev/hda1 /mnt vfat unmask=0002,gid=101,uid=0,showexec 0 2 >

Re: still fighting for normality

"Rich Harran." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > /dev/hda1 /mnt vfat unmask=0002,gid=101,uid=0,showexec 0 2 > in fstab, (where 101 is dos gid). However, the drive mounts with > permissions: > drwxr_xr_x A silly suggestion: as far as I remember off the top of my head it should be 'umask', not 'unm

still fighting for normality

I've been trying to get a dos partition mounted in group 'dos', with read-write permissions for those in this group. I found an old thread on this, and now have: /dev/hda1 /mnt vfat unmask=0002,gid=101,uid=0,showexec 0 2 in fstab, (where 101 is dos gid). However, the drive mounts with permissi