Setting up a new HD

Gomi · 08-14-2004, 06:16 AM

I know with adding a new HD, you just make an entry in /etc/fstab. But the thing that gets me is the LABEL=/ and LABEL=/var which are treated differently. Now I want the new drive to be LABEL=/home. What's the best way to go about it?

Also would there be any problem with having the file sytems as FAT32?

egag · 08-14-2004, 07:11 AM

there are a few things ,

1. adding a vfat partition: here s an example of a line in fstab

/dev/hda1 /win-c vfat defaults,users,umask=022 0 0

but if you want to mount it on /home ( above is mounted on /win-c ) , it s not wise to use vfat because the permissions
are not anymore per file but per disk. ( thats the ' users,...' etc for )
for linux partitions better use a linux file system. furthermore you have to backup the contents of your old /home before adding the new disk . but why use vfat ??

egag

Gomi · 08-16-2004, 11:00 PM

I know that ext2/3 is better, but I'm runnign a dual boot system, RH9/Win98, and would liek to be able to access all the parts. I've already added to fstab for the vfat drives, and was thinking that it would be easier for the users if they had access as home.

BTW what's the umask=002 mean?

thanks.
gomi

tim1235 · 08-17-2004, 01:19 AM

Maybe a better way is to keep the linux home directory and mount your windows partition elsewhere (eg /windows) Then you could create symbolic links to each users windows home directory so that within their home folder there is a mydocs directory which is a symbolic link to /windows/user/mydocs etc.

btw unmask=022 sets the default permissions of the files to 755 i.e rwxr-xr-x

Gomi · 08-17-2004, 05:38 AM

Thanks for that. I have had a few problems with symbolic links, and the permissions of the users.

Also how will I change the group for my windows mount? I assume I'd use chown. It just each time I've done it, the permissions change back to root. Is there anything else I need to do?

thanks.
Gomi

egag · 08-17-2004, 05:55 AM

on your last Q.: that is what the ' users ' term is for in the fstab.
and can you discribe the prob's with symbolic links ?

egag

Gomi · 08-17-2004, 09:54 PM

With the symbollic links, there is a problem with moving files within the VFAT section of the drive. Now when I use a mount on the desktop (KDE icon) there is no problem, in that I can move & delete files as I choose. But when I do the same via a s-link I have problems with permissions.

egag · 08-18-2004, 10:36 AM

maybe...you should use ' umask=000 ' ,then anyone has write-permission , and can move & del. ( i think ??)
try it , thats what the thing is for........:.-)

egag

Gomi · 08-18-2004, 09:58 PM

So unmask=011 would be -rwxrw-rw- for the windows drive..?

tim1235 · 08-18-2004, 10:13 PM

Quote:

So unmask=011 would be -rwxrw-rw- for the windows drive..?

Spot on, but you will need unmask=000 as without it you will not be able to look into the directories, as directories need the "x" permission to cd into them.

Gomi · 08-18-2004, 10:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by tim1235
Spot on, but you will need unmask=000 as without it you will not be able to look into the directories, as directories need the "x" permission to cd into them.

Thanks.

I didn't know that about the "x" permission for directories.

tim1235 · 08-18-2004, 11:41 PM

Just a note to my previous post, let me quote myself:

Quote:

you will not be able to look into the directories, as directories need the "x" permission to cd into them

Is not entirerly true. For a directory with drw-rw-rw permissions you can look into them:
i.e #ls some_dir/

but you cannot change into the directory
#cd some_dir
Permission denied

Just to make the difference clear

egag · 08-19-2004, 06:24 AM

the above here is an example of a good thread: very informative and clear,
without very much text .

i'm learning every day .

thanks all,

egag

nukkel · 08-19-2004, 06:32 AM

Now that we're talking about x anyway...

Did you know you can still execute a file that doesn't have the x permission set?

Yes, just invoke the loader manually:

Code:

$ ls -l helloworld
-rw-------   1 nukkel nukkel       1668 May 24 18:58 helloworld

$ ./helloworld
bash: ./helloworld: Permission denied

$ /lib/ld-linux.so.2 helloworld
Hello World!

Heheh

Gomi · 08-24-2004, 06:02 AM

Isn't that a security risk?

Quote:

Originally posted by nukkel
Now that we're talking about x anyway...

Did you know you can still execute a file that doesn't have the x permission set?

Yes, just invoke the loader manually:

Code:

$ ls -l helloworld -rw------- 1 nukkel nukkel 1668 May 24 18:58 helloworld $ ./helloworld bash: ./helloworld: Permission denied $ /lib/ld-linux.so.2 helloworld Hello World!

Heheh