Linux - GeneralThis Linux forum is for general Linux questions and discussion.
If it is Linux Related and doesn't seem to fit in any other forum then this is the place.
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
IIRC, GVFS is a virtual file-system used by Gnome and XFCE, so a rm or chmod wouldn't make much sense anyways, unless it is your intention to crash your DE (or at least the file-manager).
More info here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gvfs
I don't know where home is situated
So I did a fsck on /dev/sda2 (the biggest partition)
It did not help. I like to chown to myname:users
Anyway those ?? are showing trouble.
Any suggestion is welcome!
I am surprised about the answers: No problem - Don't worry.
The feature, that I like about Linux is that I understand / know what is going on.
Is there nobody among the linux users that knows how to get rid of the ???
If there is someone, Please, try to formulate an answer. Thanks
The filesystem mounted on .gvfs is a highly specialized virtual filesystem that has meaning only to programs connected to the current Gnome session. Programs outside of that session, even when run by root, are denied access and cannot even do a stat(2) system call to get the metadata for the directory. Your ls command is displaying question marks for the data it could not obtain.
If you tried to run "ls -ld ~teunis/.gvfs" you would see the "Permission denied" message that you probably overlooked somewhere in your longer ls listing.
I suppose that EPERM ("Operation not permitted") might be a more suitable setting for errno in this situation rather than EACCESS ("Permission denied"). If you were to suggest that on the Linux kernel mailing list, it might actually get a positive reception.