Linux - NetworkingThis forum is for any issue related to networks or networking.
Routing, network cards, OSI, etc. Anything is fair game.
Notices
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.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
I have mounted a hard drive into the linux file system and have set the /etc/fstab file to auto mount the drive at boot. The only problem is that all network users accessing this drive can't set their docs or folders to read-only, it defaults to read-write.
Is is something to do with the rw 0 0 option??? or the umask?
I need to give users the option of setting their priviledges themselves on mounted drives, help me please as if I can't do this the management wan't to use a Microsoft server product instead and that will create endless problems.
what is the file system you're mounting? you've not provided enough useful information really... i'd guess it's fat32 though, in which case set the umask to 000. but you can not change the permissions on a fat32 drive, as the file system does not allwo this.
I see what you mean about the Fat 32. I wanted the Fat 32 as then I could always plug the drive into a Windoze machine to manipulate the data in need be. Would it be better if I use ext3 instead and forget the Windoze idea?
well fat32 is not clever enough to understand owner/group/other permissions, it's just a brick wall when microsoft wrote a really crippled file system, nothign can ever be done about it.... if you do need full rights features on the data then youwill need a proper file system such as ext3 (or resierfs, ext2, ufs, jfs, xfs...)
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.