Tim:
> > I've never come across a charge-only cable. I understand why someone
> > would use one (e.g. public charging), but I thought some use of the
> > data pins was necessary to switch from lower power mode.
> >
> > If you keep unusual cables, label them. It'll save you from some
> > headache
On 17/08/2024 17:48, Tim via users wrote:
On Sat, 2024-08-17 at 16:08 +0700, Frederic Muller wrote:
Obviously I was using one of those non-data capable cable and no data
was going through that port.
I've never come across a charge-only cable. I understand why someone
would use one (e.g. public
On Sat, 2024-08-17 at 16:08 +0700, Frederic Muller wrote:
> Obviously I was using one of those non-data capable cable and no data
> was going through that port.
I've never come across a charge-only cable. I understand why someone
would use one (e.g. public charging), but I thought some use of th
On 17/08/2024 02:48, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
On Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 3:54 AM Frederic Muller wrote:
A few questions all related: I fly FPV drones which require to use
betaflight to configure them over the serial port. This has been working
ok in the past and is getting more and more confusing. Th
ore.
Sounds unusual.
> I´ve read that the serial port access problem could be due to group
> permissions so some guidance would help but in general I'd be happy to
> run both dmesg and the serial port from my user, and eventually
> understand why suddenly connecting the flight co
On Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 12:12 PM Barry wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 16 Aug 2024, at 08:54, Frederic Muller wrote:
> >
> > Serial port also requires sudo ( /dev/ttyACM0 ) for betaflight to be able
> > to access it
>
> Look into adding a udev rule to set the permi
> On 16 Aug 2024, at 08:54, Frederic Muller wrote:
>
> Serial port also requires sudo ( /dev/ttyACM0 ) for betaflight to be able to
> access it
Look into adding a udev rule to set the permissions you need on the serial
device.
Then you can avoid using sudo.
sudo became requir
re.
I´ve read that the serial port access problem could be due to group
permissions so some guidance would help but in general I'd be happy to
run both dmesg and the serial port from my user, and eventually
understand why suddenly connecting the flight controller to the serial
port (USB t
Thank you all.
I will likely do a reinstall, as I am using Rawhide, and would like to test
the lastest good iso.
Here is what I think I did, and my mistake was doing it at 3 in the
morning, when I was half asleep.
I logged in as root, so that I could rename the file:
/usr/share/images/backgroun
Mon, 23 Mar 2020 11:29:13 -0400
Todd Zullinger :
> > You could boot from some Live distro (Fedora Workstation Live will
> > do), mount your root partition inside /mnt/fedora/root and do
> > something like:
> >
> > find /mnt/fedora/root/usr/bin/ -type f -exec chmod 755 {} \;
>
> If you ran that c
Łukasz Posadowski wrote:
> Mon, 23 Mar 2020 02:26:39 -0400
> David :
>
>> But now, I get a sudo error message when logged in
>> the normal way as admin or sole user.
>>
>> * sudo: /usr/bin/sudo must be owned by uid 0 and have the setuid
>> bit set*
>>
>> What do I need to do to fix that ?
>
chmod 755 {} \;
>
> but I fear manually searching for every broken permission in every
> directory would take days. If You manage to fix a host enough to
> work, try to reinstall packages with dnf, which will set correct
> permissions. 775 is a little more than needed.
>
> Or You could
to fix a host enough to
work, try to reinstall packages with dnf, which will set correct
permissions. 775 is a little more than needed.
Or You could install Fedora on some virtual machine, update it and
rsync /usr dir onto Your broken installation.
Sort of:
rsync -vaxAXHSz --delete --dry-run /
On 3/23/20 12:05 AM, David wrote:
[david@localhost ~]$ ls -lZ /usr/bin/sudo
---x--x--x. 1 root wheel system_u:object_r:sudo_exec_t:s0 178240 Mar 4
03:52 /usr/bin/sudo
For reference, this is what it should be:
---s--x--x. 1 root root system_u:object_r:sudo_exec_t:s0 172720 Nov 11
07:13 /usr/b
[david@localhost ~]$ ls -lZ /usr/bin/sudo
---x--x--x. 1 root wheel system_u:object_r:sudo_exec_t:s0 178240 Mar 4
03:52 /usr/bin/sudo
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.o
On 3/22/20 11:26 PM, David wrote:
I logged in as root just for the fun of it
to mess around with my permission settings in
the /usr/ directory
not having any idea what the heck I was doing.
I am the only user of the computer ( so I am the admin ).
But now, I get a sudo error message when logged
I logged in as root just for the fun of it
to mess around with my permission settings in
the /usr/ directory
not having any idea what the heck I was doing.
I am the only user of the computer ( so I am the admin ).
But now, I get a sudo error message when logged in
the normal way as admin or sole
either run the application as root or
change the
permissions on /dev/usb/lp0. I though I could solve this problem by
using a
udev rule to recognize the printer, create a symlink, and set the
permissions. I created the following rule in
/etc/udev/rules.d/99-zebra.rules.
SUBSYSTEM=="usb&qu
I'm setting up a turnkey system that uses a Zebra brand USB barcode
printer. I need to use it without CUPS, directly printing from an
application. I've verified that this works when my application writes to
/dev/usb/lp0. I've had to either run the application as root or change the
On 03/08/19 13:36, Bill Shirley wrote:
What does the share's stanza in smb.conf look like?
.
I see the following, they are all marked writable = yes
stopping selinux or firewalld has no affect on the problem. I guess I
will resign myself to just using root to make changes from my Linux
syst
users. My directory permissions are:
drwxr-xr-x. 4 root root system_u:object_r:samba_share_t:s0 37 Jan 15 2011
/lan
drwxr-sr-x. 9 root root system_u:object_r:samba_share_t:s0 104 Feb 8 09:46
/lan/shares
drwxrwsr-x. 10 root smbusers system_u:object_r:samba_share_t:s0 4096 Feb 21
15:25 /lan/shar
On 03/05/19 15:35, Fred Smith wrote:
Yes. Put it in fstab instead of defaults.
I use this for the options in fstab:
credentials=/root/.smbcred,defaults,uid=my-username,gid=my-username,auto,users,exec,vers=3.0
the credentials= points to a file with read-only permissions, owned by root. it
On 05Mar2019 13:43, Joe Zeff wrote:
On 03/05/2019 01:35 PM, Fred Smith wrote:
I use this for the options in fstab:
credentials=/root/.smbcred,defaults,uid=my-username,gid=my-username,auto,users,exec,vers=3.0
I'm no expert on this, but I think that if you have auto, having users
is redundant
On 03/05/2019 01:35 PM, Fred Smith wrote:
I use this for the options in fstab:
credentials=/root/.smbcred,defaults,uid=my-username,gid=my-username,auto,users,exec,vers=3.0
I'm no expert on this, but I think that if you have auto, having users
is redundant, unless you want users to be able to
On Tue, Mar 05, 2019 at 01:08:43PM -0700, Joe Zeff wrote:
> On 03/05/2019 12:44 PM, Bob Goodwin wrote:
> >
> >
> >On 03/05/19 13:46, Joe Zeff wrote:
> >>On 03/05/2019 11:38 AM, Bob Goodwin wrote:
> >>>I mount it on /mnt/box48 and the problem seems to be p
On 03/05/2019 12:44 PM, Bob Goodwin wrote:
On 03/05/19 13:46, Joe Zeff wrote:
On 03/05/2019 11:38 AM, Bob Goodwin wrote:
I mount it on /mnt/box48 and the problem seems to be permissions:
I've found that mount sometimes insists on mounting partitions ro,
even if you specify r/w. The
On 03/05/19 13:46, Joe Zeff wrote:
On 03/05/2019 11:38 AM, Bob Goodwin wrote:
I mount it on /mnt/box48 and the problem seems to be permissions:
I've found that mount sometimes insists on mounting partitions ro,
even if you specify r/w. The only thing I've ever found that alw
On 03/05/2019 11:38 AM, Bob Goodwin wrote:
I mount it on /mnt/box48 and the problem seems to be permissions:
I've found that mount sometimes insists on mounting partitions ro, even
if you specify r/w. The only thing I've ever found that always works
(for me) is the mount option
sions, don't remember when things changed. I don't use it often and
have just lived with the problem.
I mount it on /mnt/box48 and the problem seems to be permissions:
[bobg@Box83 ~]$ ll /mnt/
drwxr-xr-x. 2 root root 0 Mar 3 12:11 box48
I can't chmod it -
[root@Box83
that this shouldn't be an issue
for your switches, as they won't be blocking the transfer traffic.
Humph.
Well setting the firewall on the client did not seem to make a
difference, but I went over the the switch and that is working. Now
that I know all the permissions that need t
On 1/23/19 12:50 PM, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
I can get files from a local terminal window with:
tftp localhost -cv file
I had problems with put until I saw that the file had to preexist. I did
that with touch file on my system.
From a F24 notebook on the same subnet as the one running tftp
I am trying to set up tftp server on my workstation to manage some switches.
I have done the following:
dnf install tftp tftp-server
firewall-cmd --add-service=tftp --permanent
firewall-cmd --reload
systemctl start tftp
I can get files from a local terminal window with:
tftp localhost -cv file
then it prevents any other user from
> being able to modify any of the same files.
>
> Of course I know I could add apache to the same group as the sftp
> user and chmod the files to group-writable, but the joomla
> recommendations are to have all the files 644 and directories 755. I
Hi,
> Allegedly, on or about 12 January 2019, Alex sent:
> > How do I configure apache to allow PHP scripts write access to a
> > document root without compromising security?
>
> Files/directories have three permissions, the owner, the group, and
> other users. Files
Allegedly, on or about 12 January 2019, Alex sent:
> How do I configure apache to allow PHP scripts write access to a
> document root without compromising security?
Files/directories have three permissions, the owner, the group, and
other users. Files should *not* be owned by Apach
r with php applications and how to
manage permissions of them. I don't entirely understand the
relationship between php, apache, and mod_fcgi. I fully understand how
filesystem permissions and ownership works.
I have all files at 644 and all directories at 755 in the document
root, owned by my
I 'just discovered' (more likely forgot) that if I vnc to a system as a
user, even one in the Wheel group, I cannot mount any USB devices. A
system security feature, not a bug.
Is there a policy that I can add (and full steps for it) to enable a
specific user to have USB (mount drives and suc
On 07/16/2018 04:23 PM, Max Pyziur wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Jul 2018, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
>> On 07/16/2018 12:05 PM, Max Pyziur wrote:
>>>
>>> Greetings,
>>>
>>> Twenty minutes of googling and still no answers.
>>>
>>> When I do a directory listing using 'ls -l'
>>>
>>> and I see
>>>
>>> -rw-rw-r--
>>
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On 07/16/2018 12:05 PM, Max Pyziur wrote:
Greetings,
Twenty minutes of googling and still no answers.
When I do a directory listing using 'ls -l'
and I see
-rw-rw-r--
-rw-r--r--.
What's the final period indicate.
I realize that this is a newbie qu
On 07/16/2018 12:05 PM, Max Pyziur wrote:
What's the final period indicate.
The answer is in the "info" page for "ls":
Following the file mode bits is a single character that specifies
whether an alternate access method such as an access control list
applies to the file. When
On 07/16/2018 12:05 PM, Max Pyziur wrote:
>
> Greetings,
>
> Twenty minutes of googling and still no answers.
>
> When I do a directory listing using 'ls -l'
>
> and I see
>
> -rw-rw-r--
> -rw-r--r--.
>
>
> What's the final period indicate.
>
> I realize that this is a newbie question, but
Greetings,
Twenty minutes of googling and still no answers.
When I do a directory listing using 'ls -l'
and I see
-rw-rw-r--
-rw-r--r--.
What's the final period indicate.
I realize that this is a newbie question, but I'm stumped at finding an
answer.
Much thanks.
Max
__
Hi,
I have a fedora22 system with munin-2.0.25 and have a few modules that
I just can't get to work. They all respond with some form of
"permission denied". I've disabled SELinux (security=0), and I've
checked all permissions as the user running the script.
2015/12
thank you Michael,
this tread continue on
"problem with Dependency Resolution"
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 1:15 PM, Michael Schwendt
wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Oct 2014 16:37:32 +0300, Angelo Moreschini wrote:
>
> > when I open the dialog of the program all is froze (completely)...
>
> That will need f
On Mon, 13 Oct 2014 16:37:32 +0300, Angelo Moreschini wrote:
> when I open the dialog of the program all is froze (completely)...
That will need further examination in bugzilla and in something else than
GNOME Shell for comparison. You may be right that it is the bug you've
linked, but then you c
of
dcond-edit ...
What you can suggest me to do ?
still thank you
Regards
Angelo
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 11:43 AM, Michael Schwendt
wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Oct 2014 10:17:53 +0300, Angelo Moreschini wrote:
>
> > failing to perform "dconf Editor"
>
> How does it
On Mon, 13 Oct 2014 10:17:53 +0300, Angelo Moreschini wrote:
> failing to perform "dconf Editor"
How does it fail? What did it "say"?
> I discovered that I have to change the
> execute permissions to the file user, in my directoy :
> /home/angelo_dev/.config/d
failing to perform "dconf Editor" I discovered that I have to change the
execute permissions to the file user, in my directoy :
/home/angelo_dev/.config/dconf./user
-
-rw-r--r--. 1 angelo_dev angelo_dev 7630 Oct 13 09:53 user
-
I ran the command [root @ zorro dconf] # chmod a +
On 05/23/2014 10:22 AM, Pal, Laszlo (private) wrote:
It seems this event triggered by starting a virtual machine (virsh start
fedora20). This command changes /dev/null permission to a wrong one...
is this some configuration issue or should I fill a bug?
You should contact the libvirt list or go
Hi,
It seems this event triggered by starting a virtual machine (virsh start
fedora20). This command changes /dev/null permission to a wrong one...
is this some configuration issue or should I fill a bug?
Thx
L:
On 05/20/2014 08:13 PM, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> Pal, Laszlo (private) wrote:
Yeah, I've created audit rules according to this, so let's see after
next reboot...
Thx for help
L:
On Tue 20 May 2014 08:13:44 PM CEST, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> Pal, Laszlo (private) wrote:
>> Recently I've discovered a strange thing... some rule/program or
>> whatever changing the access
Pal, Laszlo (private) wrote:
Recently I've discovered a strange thing... some rule/program or
whatever changing the access rights of /dev/null to
crw---. 1 root root 1, 3 May 20 11:57 /dev/null
and some of the part of Fedora does not like it:)
After I change back to 666, everything is fine
Hi,
Recently I've discovered a strange thing... some rule/program or
whatever changing the access rights of /dev/null to
crw---. 1 root root 1, 3 May 20 11:57 /dev/null
and some of the part of Fedora does not like it :)
After I change back to 666, everything is fine again, however after boo
l drive on which I
> > currently have my OSX Home directory. I have this drive (HFS+) mounted
> r/w
> > in Linux, but, as perhaps expected, there are a lot of issues with
> > permissions (files and directories in my OSX Home directory that i can't
> > access except
ounted r/w
> in Linux, but, as perhaps expected, there are a lot of issues with
> permissions (files and directories in my OSX Home directory that i can't
> access except if I copy them as root).
>
> Is there a way that I can with this disk in Fedora, opening files and
> writing
permissions (files and directories in my OSX Home directory that i can't
access except if I copy them as root).
Is there a way that I can with this disk in Fedora, opening files and
writing files to it that I later can access in OSX as a regular user
similar to how I can move a USB drive fro
Allegedly, on or about 25 March 2014, Rafnews sent:
> i'm trying to figure out what is the best approach for files and folders
> permissions in case of a shared webserver.
>
> we are 2-3 developers and we have a server on which we installed Fedora
> 20 as web server for our
, each web, and
communicate it to all participants of the project or web.
suomi
On 2014-03-25 14:35, Rafnews wrote:
Hi,
i'm trying to figure out what is the best approach for files and folders
permissions in case of a shared webserver.
we are 2-3 developers and we have a server on whi
, Rafnews wrote:
Hi,
i'm trying to figure out what is the best approach for files and folders
permissions in case of a shared webserver.
we are 2-3 developers and we have a server on which we installed Fedora
20 as web server for our development testing purpose.
all websites should be stor
...@fedoraproject.org]
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 10:13 AM
To: Community support for Fedora users
Subject: Re: user and groups permissions
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 02:35:57PM +0100, Rafnews wrote:
> i'm trying to figure out what is the best approach for files and
> folders permissions in case
for me ACL includes the user permissions ?
On 25.03.2014 15:25, Pittigher, Raymond - Exelis wrote:
Or you can try using FACL
-
Ray Pittigher
--Exelis Inc, Clifton NJ
--phone 973-284-2275
--email raymond.pittig...@exelisinc.com
From: users-boun
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 02:35:57PM +0100, Rafnews wrote:
> i'm trying to figure out what is the best approach for files and
> folders permissions in case of a shared webserver.
> we are 2-3 developers and we have a server on which we installed
> Fedora 20 as web server for our de
Hi,
i'm trying to figure out what is the best approach for files and folders
permissions in case of a shared webserver.
we are 2-3 developers and we have a server on which we installed Fedora
20 as web server for our development testing purpose.
all websites should be stored in /va
On 23/09/13 17:14, inode0 wrote:
It is informative, it tells you what sort of "file" you are looking
at. No different than
# ls -ld /usr/bin
dr-xr-xr-x. 2 root root 69632 Sep 23 09:20 /usr/bin
which begins with a 'd' telling you that /usr/bin is a directory.
>Is there a mknod command to rem
On 23/09/13 15:13, Paul W. Frields wrote:
>[root@box10 bobg]# ll /dev/sdb*
>brw-rw. 1 root disk 8, 16 Sep 23 14:36 /dev/sdb
>brw-rw. 1 root disk 8, 17 Sep 23 14:36 /dev/sdb1
It means the file is a block device node. Typically control of that
file/device is through a device driver. In
On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 3:58 PM, Bob Goodwin ~ Zuni, Virginia, USA
wrote:
> Are you saying that the "b" is merely to control the color in a listing? I
> view everything in black and white.
>
> Does it have any other effect?
It is informative, it tells you what sort of "file" you are looking
at. N
, etc...
Why are you worried about these?
>
> From: "Bob Goodwin ~ Zuni, Virginia, USA"
>To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org
>Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 4:58 PM
>Subject: Re: permissions -
>
>
>
>
>On 23/09/13 16:07
On 23/09/13 16:07, poma wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ls;)
File types
$ ll --color /dev/sdb*
$ file /dev/sdb*
# file --special-files /dev/sdb*
poma
Are you saying that the "b" is merely to control the color in a listing?
I view everything in black and white.
Does it have any othe
On 09/23/2013 01:13 PM, Bob Goodwin ~ Zuni, Virginia, USA issued this
missive:
On 23/09/13 15:05, Bob Goodwin ~ Zuni, Virginia, USA wrote:
I spent the last half hour googling with no success. What does the "b"
mean and how is it controlled?
[root@box10 bobg]# ll /dev/sdb*
brw-rw. 1 root
09/23/2013 01:13 PM, Bob Goodwin ~ Zuni, Virginia, USA wrote:
On 23/09/13 15:05, Bob Goodwin ~ Zuni, Virginia, USA wrote:
I spent the last half hour googling with no success. What does the "b"
mean and how is it controlled?
[root@box10 bobg]# ll /dev/sdb*
brw-rw. 1 root disk 8, 16 Sep 23
On 23/09/13 15:05, Bob Goodwin ~ Zuni, Virginia, USA wrote:
I spent the last half hour googling with no success. What does the "b"
mean and how is it controlled?
[root@box10 bobg]# ll /dev/sdb*
brw-rw. 1 root disk 8, 16 Sep 23 14:36 /dev/sdb
brw-rw. 1 root disk 8, 17 Sep 23 14:36 /d
On 23.09.2013 21:05, Bob Goodwin ~ Zuni, Virginia, USA wrote:
>
> I spent the last half hour googling with no success. What does the "b"
> mean and how is it controlled?
>
> [root@box10 bobg]# ll /dev/sdb*
> brw-rw. 1 root disk 8, 16 Sep 23 14:36 /dev/sdb
> brw-rw. 1 root disk 8, 17 Sep
On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 12:08:57PM -0700, Joe Wulf wrote:
> "b" stands for block device; just like "c" will represent a character device.
>
> I looked all over the place for that kind of information years ago...
> strangely, I found in when scanning the man page for 'find'.
This may be helpful,
On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 03:05:45PM -0400, Bob Goodwin ~ Zuni, Virginia, USA
wrote:
>
> I spent the last half hour googling with no success. What does the
> "b" mean and how is it controlled?
>
> [root@box10 bobg]# ll /dev/sdb*
> brw-rw. 1 root disk 8, 16 Sep 23 14:36 /dev/sdb
> brw-rw. 1
On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 2:05 PM, Bob Goodwin ~ Zuni, Virginia, USA
wrote:
>
> I spent the last half hour googling with no success. What does the "b" mean
> and how is it controlled?
>
> [root@box10 bobg]# ll /dev/sdb*
> brw-rw. 1 root disk 8, 16 Sep 23 14:36 /dev/sdb
> brw-rw. 1 root disk
> I spent the last half hour googling with no success. What does the "b"
> mean and how is it controlled?
>
> [root@box10 bobg]# ll /dev/sdb*
> brw-rw. 1 root disk 8, 16 Sep 23 14:36 /dev/sdb brw-rw. 1 root
> disk 8, 17 Sep 23 14:36 /dev/sdb1
>
> Bob
The first character is the file type.
t;Bob Goodwin ~ Zuni, Virginia, USA"
>To: Fedora List
>Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 3:05 PM
>Subject: permissions -
>
>
>
>I spent the last half hour googling with no success. What does the "b"
>mean and how is it controlled?
>
>[root@box10 bobg]#
I spent the last half hour googling with no success. What does the "b"
mean and how is it controlled?
[root@box10 bobg]# ll /dev/sdb*
brw-rw. 1 root disk 8, 16 Sep 23 14:36 /dev/sdb
brw-rw. 1 root disk 8, 17 Sep 23 14:36 /dev/sdb1
Bob
--
http://www.qrz.com/db/W2BOD
box10 Fedora-1
Quoting Max Pyziur :
Greetings,
A user on my box has Wordpress installed under a virtualhost.
He has other users uploading photos to different directories using
Wordpress' interface. The concern is that these directories are
defaulting/need to be setup to 777 permissions for the up
efaulting/need to be setup to 777 permissions for the uploads to be
> successful.
>
> Any advice on how to change this to more secure directory permissions?
Just `chown` the uploads directories to the user WordPress is running
as (most likely "httpd"), then you can `chmod 755`
Greetings,
A user on my box has Wordpress installed under a virtualhost.
He has other users uploading photos to different directories using
Wordpress' interface. The concern is that these directories are
defaulting/need to be setup to 777 permissions for the uploads to be
successful.
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 06:59:06PM -0700, T.C. Hollingsworth wrote:
> What gotchas, out of curiosity?
> I've always done this with `usermod -aG group user`. Would that also
> be affected?
That's fine too. -a didn't aways exist, which made it painful, because you
had to get the current list and re
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 6:54 PM, Matthew Miller
wrote:
> system-config-users seems to be still available. It's moderately
> user-friendly. From the command line, I think 'gpasswd groupname -a
> username' is the easiest. (You can use groupmod, but it's got some gotchas
> with behavior where gpasswd
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 11:07:13AM +0930, Tim wrote:
> Allegedly, on or about 17 July 2013, Matthew Miller sent:
> > Type "groups" without your username to show your _current_ groups --
> > remember that adding yourself to a group doesn't take effect until you
> > start a new session. (E.g. by logg
Allegedly, on or about 17 July 2013, Matthew Miller sent:
> Type "groups" without your username to show your _current_ groups --
> remember that adding yourself to a group doesn't take effect until you
> start a new session. (E.g. by logging out and in again.)
Or opening a new terminal?
Darned i
Am 17.07.2013 21:15, schrieb Joe Zeff:
> On 07/17/2013 11:18 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>> i did: "otherwise my /var/log/maillog on my workstation would not have 644"
>> this is "logrotaded" - logrotate keeps the permissions/owner/group if
>> not specified
On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 23:04 +0200, Suvayu Ali wrote:
> PS: I guess I'm not thinking straight today. This thread has plenty
> of evidence to that. :-/
"Even Homer nods" (no, not *that* Homer :-)
poc
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription option
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 09:59:00PM +0100, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 16:18 +0200, Suvayu Ali wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 03:59:35PM +0200, Timothy Murphy wrote:
> > > I'm tired of saying "sudo less /var/log/maillog" or "messages".
> >
> > For /var/log/messages you co
On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 16:18 +0200, Suvayu Ali wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 03:59:35PM +0200, Timothy Murphy wrote:
> > I'm tired of saying "sudo less /var/log/maillog" or "messages".
>
> For /var/log/messages you could use `dmesg -T | less +G' instead.
>
> Hope this helps,
That's not quite t
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 12:57:02PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 06:02:47PM +0200, Suvayu Ali wrote:
> > > Note that if you're using the systemd journal (and you are, in recent
> > > Fedora, including persistent logging to disk with F19), adding yourself to
> > > the 'syste
On 07/17/2013 12:24 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 17.07.2013 21:15, schrieb Joe Zeff:
I'm the only person who ever uses my laptop. If I wanted, then, I could use
this to make /var/log/messages world
readable for convenience. No, I'm not going to do it because unless I do it to
all of my ma
On 07/17/2013 11:18 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
i did: "otherwise my /var/log/maillog on my workstation would not have 644"
this is "logrotaded" - logrotate keeps the permissions/owner/group if
not specified like below (which is my own config-piece)
/var/log/script
On 07/17/2013 10:29 AM, Chris Adams wrote:
Once upon a time, Timothy Murphy said:
Will it cause any problems if I change the permissions on these files?
Nope, been doing it for years.
so have I. Never been a surprise or problem
--
Roger Wells, P.E.
SAIC
221 Third St
Newport, RI 02840
401
e file,
> it will not have world-readable set. Once the file is created, syslog*
> won't change the permissions
that's the detail
> I can't speak to what logrotate will do to them, however.
i did: "otherwise my /var/log/maillog on my workstation would not have 644"
always
assign the frequently used commands aliases.
I guess my question should have been:
Will it cause any problems if I change the permissions on these files?
Is there any program that won't work if you do this,
as is true eg of some .ssh and pki files?
But why bother? You can't be as
Am 17.07.2013 15:59, schrieb Timothy Murphy:
> I'm tired of saying "sudo less /var/log/maillog" or "messages".
> Is there any non-paranoiac reason for not making /var/log/ files
> readable say by wheel?
chown/chgrp/chmod exists
[harry@rh:~]$ ls /var/log/maillog
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 7,1K 2013-
ssign the frequently used commands aliases.
>>> I guess my question should have been:
>>> Will it cause any problems if I change the permissions on these files?
>>> Is there any program that won't work if you do this,
>>> as is true eg of some .ssh and pki fi
On 07/17/2013 09:57 AM, Matthew Miller issued this missive:
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 09:44:41AM -0700, Rick Stevens wrote:
The reason the files are, by default, NOT world-readable is simply one
of security. Many programs (if using verbose logging) may expose
security-related items in plaintext in
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 09:44:41AM -0700, Rick Stevens wrote:
> The reason the files are, by default, NOT world-readable is simply one
> of security. Many programs (if using verbose logging) may expose
> security-related items in plaintext in the log files (usernames,
> passwords, GPG keys, etc.).
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 06:02:47PM +0200, Suvayu Ali wrote:
> > Note that if you're using the systemd journal (and you are, in recent
> > Fedora, including persistent logging to disk with F19), adding yourself to
> > the 'systemd-journal' group will allow you to see system logs with
> > 'journalctl
1 - 100 of 292 matches
Mail list logo
