Search Results

Search found 24117 results on 965 pages for 're write'.

Page 12/965 | < Previous Page | 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19  | Next Page >

  • Mount "locked" SD card as read-write in GNU/Linux

    - by Vi
    My Canon PowerShot A470 + CHDK can write to SD-cards that are "locked" (the lock switch is used to make the card bootable), but GNU/Linux `/dev/mmcblk1': Read-only file system (I'm using "Texas Instrument 5-in-1 Multimedia Card Reader") So I have to switch that switch on and off again and again. ("unlocked" to write to the card in Linux, "locked" to boot the camera from it). How to force locked card to be writable in GNU/Linux?

    Read the article

  • Does BitLocker reduce write reliability?

    - by Unsigned
    For the purposes of this question, BitLocker refers to the BitLocker-to-go variety on a disk with write-caching disabled. NTFS supports metadata journaling, which, although not completely failsafe, does mitigate certain types of potential filesystem errors. Assuming an NTFS volume is protected with BitLocker, does this reduce the failure tolerance? Would a power failure during a write to an NTFS volume, that's protected with BitLocker, be more prone to corruption than on an unencrypted NTFS volume?

    Read the article

  • Write vim file as super-user ?

    - by zimbatm
    This is a usability problem that happens often to me : I open a read-only system file with vim, even editing it, because I'm not attentive enough, or because the vim on the system is badly configured. Once my changes are done, I'm stuck having to write them in a temporary file or loosing them, because :w! won't work. Is there a vim command (:W!!!) that allows you to write the current buffer as a super-user ? (Vim would ask for your sudo or su password naturally)

    Read the article

  • Apache and PHP write permission?

    - by thedp
    Hello, I have a php script that writes to a file. But when I try to actually write to the file I get permission denied. How can I tell what user name I need to add to the file permission in order for the php to write to it? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Konsole Read/Write Access to PTY Device

    - by Carmen
    When I run something like: $ konsole -e "sleep 30" I get this message Konsole is unable to open a PTY (pseudo teletype). It is likely that this is due to an incorrect configuration of the PTY devices. Konsole needs to have read/write access to the PTY devices. But if I try to run this: $ gnome-terminal -e "sleep 30" Then it is fine, and it does not throw any error. How can I change the read/write access of the Konsole to the PTY devices?

    Read the article

  • question about a sata read/write speed

    - by Joe
    I'm contemplating biting the bullet for an ssd drive in a server, obviously I know it will be MUCH faster than a regular 7200rpm sata2 3gbps drive. The nice thing about ssd's is often they post the read/write speed but that info isn't available for sata's so I'm just curious to know what a typical read/write speed would be for a seagate 120gb 7200rpm drive. I know it fluctuates from manufacturer and model series but I'm just looking for a guestimate.

    Read the article

  • C# file write permission issue under "Program Files" folder

    - by George2
    Hello everyone, I am using inno setup to make a installation package for my application, and my application is written by C# + .Net 2.0 + VSTS 2008. Inno setup = http://www.jrsoftware.org/isinfo.php and I install my application under Program Files/Foo folder (Foo is my application name). My application is targeting to Windows Vista. The issue I found is my program cannot write to the folder Program Files/Foo. And I need the permission of write to this folder in order to save some configuration files. The strange thing I notice is the folder Program Files/Foo is marked as readonly and I have checked all folders under Program Files are marked with read only, such as Office. My questions are, Why all folders are marked as read only under Program Files? It means we should not write to individual application folders under Program Files? If not, where should we write information to disk like user last selected configuration information of an individual application? If we could write to individual application folders under Program Files, what is the solution? I do not want my application to Run As administrator to solve this issue, and if there are solution to write to this folder, I want to require minimal permission if possible. thanks in advance, George

    Read the article

  • Slow file operations, possible I/O error but chkdsk says OK

    - by mikolajek
    I've recently faced a strange problem. I use Directory Opus file manager that suddenly started to report an I/O error when trying to copy files onto one of my disks. The Windows Explorer did copy those files but it was extremely slow. I run chkdsk on this drive (ca. 300GB) and it took it over two days to complete! However it reported no errors found. I run Hard Disk Sentinel that says the drive is OK. But the files still read and write extremely slow! Can anyone advise me what to do? I have a spare space I am copying my files for backup now but should I get rid of this disk? Or can I try to "heal" it somehow? Many thanks for your ideas!

    Read the article

  • create and write to a text file in vb.net

    - by woolardz
    I'm creating a small vb.net application, and I'm trying trying to write a list of results from a listview to a text file. I've looked online and found the code to open the save file dialog and write the text file. When I click save on the save file dialog, I receive an IOException with the message "The process cannot access the file 'C:\thethe.txt' because it is being used by another process." The text file is created in the correct location, but is empty. The application quits at this line "Dim fs As New FileStream(saveFileDialog1.FileName, FileMode.OpenOrCreate, FileAccess.Write)" Thanks in advance for any help. Private Sub btnSave_Click(ByVal sender As System.Object, ByVal e As System.EventArgs) Handles btnSave.Click Dim myStream As Stream Dim saveFileDialog1 As New SaveFileDialog() saveFileDialog1.Filter = "txt files (*.txt)|*.txt|All files (*.*)|*.*" saveFileDialog1.FilterIndex = 2 saveFileDialog1.RestoreDirectory = True If saveFileDialog1.ShowDialog() = DialogResult.OK Then myStream = saveFileDialog1.OpenFile() If (myStream IsNot Nothing) Then Dim fs As New FileStream(saveFileDialog1.FileName, FileMode.OpenOrCreate, FileAccess.Write) Dim m_streamWriter As New StreamWriter(fs) m_streamWriter.Flush() 'Write to the file using StreamWriter class m_streamWriter.BaseStream.Seek(0, SeekOrigin.Begin) 'write each row of the ListView out to a tab-delimited line in a file For i As Integer = 0 To Me.ListView1.Items.Count - 1 m_streamWriter.WriteLine(((ListView1.Items(i).Text & vbTab) + ListView1.Items(i).SubItems(0).ToString() & vbTab) + ListView1.Items(i).SubItems(1).ToString()) Next myStream.Close() End If End If End Sub

    Read the article

  • Best tool for writing a Programming Book?

    - by walkthedog
    Well, this is not directly programming related! But a friend of mine wants to write a book about programming. Now he asked me if I knew a good software for this, because Word crashes 10 times a day on his machine, and OpenOffice is just very chunky and slow. Also none of them seem to have any useful support for including Code Listings (examples) with useful syntax highlighting or at least some sort of support for inserting code (i.e. indicating line breaks with arrows that turn around, line numbers, etc). Latex is out of question since it's incredible hard to use and has no really useful feature for including tables. It's a mess. Maybe some IT authors are here who can give some hints what tools they use. That would be great!

    Read the article

  • Text + randomchar dosn't work [JavaScript]

    - by user558773
    <script> function makeid() { var text = "var text = document.write(lastNumber);"; var possible = "*+-/"; for( var i=0; i < 1; i++ ) document.write(lastNumber + possible.charAt(Math.floor(Math.random() * possible.length)); return text; } document.write(makeid(1))</script> How do i make this to type for ex: 23* 45- 13/ and so on. What is wrong? It just show me 2 numbers and no char after.

    Read the article

  • r1soft agent is failing with the error: "write error while sending code: Broken pipe"

    - by curiousguy
    I have an Ubuntu 10.04.4 LTS server with r1soft agent installed in it. Recently, the backups are failing with the following error. -------- write error while sending code: Broken pipe -------- I have reinstalled the buagent but to no avail. On checking the server logs, I could see the following errors listed in it: -------- # tail -f /var/log/messages |grep -i buagent Nov 17 03:35:06 microscope buagent: Need to back up 126 sectors Nov 17 03:35:06 microscope buagent: (Righteous Backup Linux Agent) 1.79.0 build 12433 Nov 17 03:35:06 microscope buagent: allowing control from backup server (10.128.136.195) with valid RSA key Nov 17 03:35:06 microscope buagent: allowing control from backup server (10.128.136.201) with valid RSA key Nov 17 03:35:06 microscope buagent: sending auth challenge for allowed host at (10.128.136.201) port (47890) Nov 17 03:35:06 microscope buagent: host (10.128.136.201) port (47890) authentication successful Nov 17 03:35:06 microscope buagent: Backup request accepted. Starting backup. Nov 17 03:35:06 microscope buagent: Snapshot completed in 0.010 seconds. Nov 17 03:45:03 microscope buagent: Error reading blocks from snapshot. Nov 17 03:45:03 microscope buagent: Reading blocks failed Nov 17 03:45:03 microscope buagent: error backup aborted Nov 17 03:45:03 microscope buagent: backup failed on agent closing connection Nov 17 03:45:03 microscope buagent: Backup failed. Nov 17 03:45:03 microscope buagent: write error while sending code: Broken pipe (32) Nov 17 03:45:03 microscope buagent: tell child write failed -------- I tried changing the 'Timeout' and 'DiskAsPartition' value in '/etc/buagent/agent_config' file but no luck. Also, verified that proper route is added to the backup server. The agent is also running fine. Am I missing anything? Any help would be much appreciated. Note: CDP 2.0 is installed in the backup server.

    Read the article

  • SSD, AHCI and write performance

    - by Dan
    We've started to deploy SSD drives to our developers workstations. At this moment we're having the unpleasant surprise that the systems using the new SSDs often freeze, with the HDD activity led blinking or being continuously on. Benchmarks shows read speeds around 180 MB/s, but write speeds around 5 MB/s. All developers are using Windows 7 Enterprise, 64 bit, SP1. One of our developers suggested (based on his experience) the following sequence: backup the workstation use a tool to completely erase the SSD make sure AHCI is enabled in BIOS install Windows restore from backup So far, this procedure seems to work (we're still testing, but write speed seems to be 120 MB/s). There are some questions in this context: why do we have to completely reinstall Windows? Is it possible to clean the SSD without reinstalling Windows? Is there a reliable tool? If AHCI was disabled when Windows was installed and we enable it, shouldn't this be enough to correct the write performance issue? If we have to completely erase the SSDs, does this mean the SSDs we've received were used before (SH)? I'm wondering this because the package I've got was open (I didn't think about it at that time, as I considered one of my coworkers simply took a peek inside the package). Has anyone seen a similar problem before?

    Read the article

  • Advanced Linux file permission question (ownership change during write operation)

    - by Kent
    By default the umask is 0022: usera@cmp$ touch somefile; ls -l total 0 -rw-r--r-- 1 usera usera 0 2009-09-22 22:30 somefile The directory /home/shared/ is meant for shared files and should be owned by root and the shared group. Files created here by usern (any user) are automatically owned by the shared group. There is a cron-job taking care of changing owning user and owning group (of any moved files) once per day: usera@cmp$ cat /etc/cron.daily/sharedscript #!/bin/bash chown -R root:shared /home/shared/ chmod -R 770 /home/shared/ I was writing a really large file to the shared directory. It had me (usera) as owning user and the shared group as group owner. During the write operation the cron job was run, and I still had no problem completing the write process. You see. I thought this would happen: I am writing the file. The file permissions and ownership data for the file looks like this: -rw-r--r-- usera shared The cron job kicks in! The chown line is processed and now the file is owned by the root user and the shared group. As the owning group only has read access to the file I get a file write error! Boom! End of story. Why did the operation succeed? A link to some kind of reference documentation to back up the reason would be very welcome (as I could use it to study more details).

    Read the article

  • Cannot write samba shares

    - by Batsu
    Running samba 3.5 on Red Hat Enterprise 6.1 I'm having issues sharing two folders. Here is the output of testparm: [global] workgroup = DOMAINNAME server string = Samba Server Version %v interfaces = lo, eth1 bind interfaces only = Yes map to guest = Bad User log file = /var/log/samba/log.%m max log size = 50 idmap uid = 16777216-33554431 idmap gid = 16777216-33554431 hosts allow = 10.50.183.48, 10.50.184.41, 10.50.184.199, 10.50.183.160, 127.0.0.1 hosts deny = 0.0.0.0/0 cups options = raw [test] comment = test folder path = /usr/local/samba valid users = claudio write list = claudio force user = claudio read only = No create mask = 0775 directory mask = 0775 [test2] comment = another test path = /home/claudio/tst valid users = claudio write list = claudio force user = claudio read only = No create mask = 0775 From the Windows XP machine I'm connecting from I'm able to read test but not write, while for test2 I can't even access the folder (though I can see it listed). ls -l /usr/local ... drwxrwxrwx. 2 claudio claudio 4096 Dec 3 10:39 samba ... ls -l /user/local/samba total 32 -rwxrwxrwx. 1 claudio claudio 9 Nov 29 16:26 asd.txt -rwxrwxrwx. 1 claudio claudio 728 Dec 3 10:16 out.txt ... ls -l /home/claudio/ ... drwxrwxr-x. 2 claudio claudio 4096 Dec 3 09:57 tst ... ls -l /home/claudio/tst total 4 -rw-rw-r--. 1 claudio claudio 4 Dec 3 09:57 asd.txt Any suggestion?

    Read the article

  • Flash Backed Write Cache (FBWC) without capacitor pack

    - by Martyn
    I brought a HP Smart Array P410 controller and it is installed and working fine in a HP Prolient Microserver with 4 drives in two RAID 1 arrays. I didn’t realise however that it came without any cache so would only work by directly writing straight to the disk, and the performance was horrible. So I then brought the 512MB Flash Backed Write Cache (FBWC) memory module as I was under the impression that with FBWC I would not need a battery. I got this idea from a forum post. "What do you guys think of the choice between 'BBWC' (battery backed write cache) and 'FBWC' (flash backed write cache)? The flashed based ones use non-volitile memory so need no battery." After installing the cache module however the server pretty much won’t boot. The P410 has a flashing amber light on it, and from the manual that doesn’t sound good. I’ve managed to get to the on board BIOS once and even managed to get to boot to the HP Array Configuration Utility (ACU) CD once, but every other time the Server continuingly reboots once it get to the POST screen and reads ARRAY INITILIZING %%%. The one time I reached the ACU, it reported a problem with the Cache Module. To me, it seems like the cache module is faulty, however the supplier tells me “Do you have an FBWC battery pack, p/n 587324-001, because that is required for the cache to work. If you have it, please complete an RMA form and we'll send a replacement / credit.” Does this sound right to you? I’ve been ordering the parts from the US and I don’t want to spend $77 + $40 p&p on a battery, wait a week for the shipping to find the card is faulty, and I don’t want to send back a working card?

    Read the article

  • IIS7.5 - about app pool ID's and folder read/write access

    - by merk
    I did some searching and it looks like for each app pool, there should be an account created called IIS APPPOOL\AppPoolName - however i can see no such account when i try to modify the permissions on a folder to give that app write access. The closest I have found is the IIS_IUSRS group. Now, if i go into that group and look at the members, i see several IIS APPPOOL\PoolName members. But where are these members coming from? Why don't they show up under the users? And why can't i add a specific one to a folder? It doesn't make sense to me to add the IIS_IUSRS group to a folder since they gives every site access to the folder. To be more specific, I'm setting up wordpress and it unfortunately wants write access to the root folder. So i want to restrict it as much a possible. I was trying to figure out how to set it so that the WP root folder has write access only for the ID that the blog's app pool is running under. When i drill down into the IIS_IUSRS group, i do not see the app pool for the blog listed there. The settings for the blog's app pool are: No managed code, Classic, ApplicationPoolIdentity, and it's named 'blog' So any explanations regarding these users that are created for the app pools, and why the blog doesn't seem to belong to the iusrs group? thanks

    Read the article

  • How to write rules for persistent net names?

    - by ndemou
    I know that a process generates persistent network card names based on rules found in /lib/udev/rules.d/75-persistent-net-generator.rules. I also know how to completely disable this process with a simple echo '#' > /etc/udev/rules.d/75-persistent-net-generator.rules but I've read that I "could also write my own rules file to give the interface a name — the persistent rules generator ignores the interface if a name has already been set" (/etc/udev/rules.d/README confirms that this is possible). Do you have any pointers to documentation about how to write such rules? (I mostly care about Debian/Ubuntu and a bit less for CentOS) As a specific example of why I want to write custom rules: I have two identical servers with one onboard LAN and one PCI LAN. In case of HW failure I want to be able to move disks from HW#1 to HW#2 and it's important for eth0 to continue pointing to the onboard card and eth1 to the PCI card (no one wants to mess with cabling in the middle of a HW failure panic). My current workaround works but is a lot of work[1] so I wonder if writing custom rules would allow me to express something simple like this: cards with MAC A or B should be named eth0 cards with MAC C or D should be named eth1 follow default naming scheme for anything else [1] install the OS in HW#1 and keep a copy of /etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules. Move the disks to HW#2 and keep a second copy of the same file. Concatenate the two copies and manually edit the NAME="ethX" part. Replace /etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules with my version. Finally disable auto-creation of a new 70-persistent-net.rules using echo '#' > /etc/udev/rules.d/75-persistent-net-generator.rules

    Read the article

  • Write once, read many (WORM) using Linux file system

    - by phil_ayres
    I have a requirement to write files to a Linux file system that can not be subsequently overwritten, appended to, updated in any way, or deleted. Not by a sudo-er, root, or anybody. I am attempting to meet the requirements of the financial services regulations for recordkeeping, FINRA 17A-4, which basically requires that electronic documents are written to WORM (write once, read many) devices. I would very much like to avoid having to use DVDs or expensive EMC Centera devices. Is there a Linux file system, or can SELinux support the requirement for files to be made complete immutable immediately (or at least soon) after write? Or is anybody aware of a way I could enforce this on an existing file system using Linux permissions, etc? I understand that I can set readonly permissions, and the immutable attribute. But of course I expect that a root user would be able to unset those. I considered storing data to small volumes that are unmounted and then remounted read-only, but then I think that root could still unmount and remount as writable again. I'm looking for any smart ideas, and worst case scenario I'm willing to do a little coding to 'enhance' an existing file system to provide this. Assuming there is a file system that is a good starting point. And put in place a carefully configured Linux server to act as this type of network storage device, doing nothing else. After all of that, encryption on the files would be useful too!

    Read the article

  • Users suddenly missing write permissions to the root drive c within an active directory domain

    - by Kevin
    I'm managing an active directory single domain environment on some Windows Server 2008, Windows Server 2008 R2 and Windows Server 2012 machines. Since a few weeks I got a strange issue. Some users (not all!) report that they cannot any longer save, copy or write files to the root drive c, whether on their clients (vista, win 7) nor via remote desktop connection on a Windows Server 2008 machine. Even running programs that require direct write permissions to the root drive without administrator permissions fail to do so since then. The affected users have local administrator permissions. The question I'm facing now is: What caused this change of system behavior? Why did this happen? I didn't find out yet. What was the last thing I did before it happened? The last action that was made before it happened was the rollout of a GPO containing network drive mappings for the users depending on their security group membership. All network drives are located on a linux server with samba enabled. We did not change any UAC settings, and they have always been activated. However I can't imagine that rolling out this GPO caused the problem. Has anybody faced an issue like that? Just in case: I know that it is for a specific reason that an user without administrative privileges is prevented from writing to the root drive since windows vista and the implementation of UAC. I don't think that those users should be able to write to drive c, but I try to figure out why this is happening and a few weeks ago this was still working. I also know that a user who is a member of the local administrators group does not execute anything with administrator permissions per default unless he or she executes a program with this permissions. What did I do yet? I checked the permissions of the affected programs, the affected clients/server. Didn't find something special. I checked ALL of our GPOs if there exist any restrictions that could prevent the affected users from writing to the root drive. Did not find any settings. I checked the UAC settings of the affected users and compared those to other users that still can write to the root drive. Everything similar. I googled though the internet and tried to find someone who had a similar problem. Did not find one. Has anybody an idea? Thank you very much. Edit: The GPO that was rolled out does the following (Please excuse if the settings are not named exactly like that, I translated the settings into english): **Windows Settings -- Network Drive Mappings -- Drive N: -- General:** Action: Replace **Properties:** Letter: N Location: \\path-to-drive\drivename Re-Establish connection: deactivated Label as: Name_of_the_Share Use first available Option: deactivated **Windows Settings -- Network Drive Mappings -- Drive N: -- Public: Options:** On error don't process any further elements for this extension: no Run as the logged in user: no remove element if it is not applied anymore: no Only apply once: no **Securitygroup:** Attribute -- Value bool -- AND not -- 0 name -- domain\groupname sid -- sid-of-the-group userContext -- 1 primaryGroup -- 0 localGroup -- 0 **Securitygroup:** Attribute -- Value bool -- OR not -- 0 name -- domain\another-groupname sid -- sid-of-the-group userContext -- 1 primaryGroup -- 0 localGroup -- 0 Edit: The Error-Message of an affected users says the following: Due to an unexpected error you can't copy the file. Error-Code 0x80070522: The client is missing a required permission. The command icacls C: shows the following: NT-AUTORITY\SYSTEM:(OI)(CI)(F) PRE-DEFINED\Administrators:(OI)(CI)(F) computername\username:(OI)(CI)(F) A college just told me that also the primary domain-controller (PDC) changed from Windows Server 2008 to Windows Server 2012. That also may be a reason. Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • How do I write to an outer truecrypt volume when the inner volume protection prevents writng?

    - by con-f-use
    In a nutshell After some time using the outer volume of a hidden volume in Truecrypt I cannot write to the outer volume anymore. The protection of the inner volume always kicks in before. How do I fix this? Details I'm using truecrypt's two layered encryption of a USB stick. The outer container carries my semi-sensitive stuff while the inner hidden values has a bit more valuable information. I use both, the inner and outer volume regularly and that is part of the problem. Truecrypt can mount the outer volume for writing while protecting the inner. Usually the inner volume, when not protected this way (or mounted read-only) would be indistinguishable from free space. That is of course part of the plausible deniability scheme of truecrypt. At the beginning, everything worked as expected. I could copy and delete data to the outer volume as I pleased. Now it seams that I have written and deleted enough data to have filled the outer volume once. Despite the write protection Ubuntu tries now to write to the continuous "free space" that is the inner volume. It does that although enough other free space is on the outer volume. But on this free space there used to be data so its fragmented and the file system write prefers continuous space. The write on the continuous free space of the outer volume of course fails (with the error message in the picture above) as Truecrypt's inner-volume-protection kicks in. The Question I know this is expected behaviour, but is there a better way to write to the outer volume that does not attempt to write to the hidden free space at the end? The whole question could be more generally rephrased to: How do I control, where on a partition data is written in Ubuntu?

    Read the article

  • FPDF in PHP, setX just indents first row

    - by Cinaird
    I use FPDF to creat PDF from PHP and i have a problem with the Write() function i use the following code and i want to indent the text block not just the first row: $pdf->SetX(60); $pdf->Write(5,'' . str_repeat( ' This is a test of setX.', 30 )); but as you can understand it's just indents the first row, any idea on how to move the whole text mas?

    Read the article

  • Why does the rename() syscall prohibit moving a directory that I can't write to a different director

    - by Daniel Papasian
    I am trying to understand why this design decision was made with the rename() syscall in 4.2BSD. There's nothing I'm trying to solve here, just understand the rationale for the behavior itself. 4.2BSD saw the introduction of the rename() syscall for the purpose of allowing atomic renames/moves of files. From 4.3BSD-Reno/src/sys/ufs/ufs_vnops.c: /* * If ".." must be changed (ie the directory gets a new * parent) then the source directory must not be in the * directory heirarchy above the target, as this would * orphan everything below the source directory. Also * the user must have write permission in the source so * as to be able to change "..". We must repeat the call * to namei, as the parent directory is unlocked by the * call to checkpath(). */ if (oldparent != dp->i_number) newparent = dp->i_number; if (doingdirectory && newparent) { VOP_LOCK(fndp->ni_vp); error = ufs_access(fndp->ni_vp, VWRITE, tndp->ni_cred); VOP_UNLOCK(fndp->ni_vp); So clearly this check was added intentionally. My question is - why? Is this behavior supposed to be intuitive? The effect of this is that one cannot move a directory (located in a directory that one can write) that one cannot write to another directory that one can write to atomically. You can, however, create a new directory, move the links over (assuming one has read access to the directory), and then remove one's write bit on the directory. You just can't do so atomically. % cd /tmp % mkdir stackoverflow-question % cd stackoverflow-question % mkdir directory-1 % mkdir directory-2 % mkdir directory-1/directory-i-cant-write % echo "foo" > directory-1/directory-i-cant-write/contents % chmod 000 directory-1/directory-i-cant-write/contents % chmod 000 directory-1/directory-i-cant-write % mv directory-1/directory-i-cant-write directory-2 mv: rename directory-1/directory-i-cant-write to directory-2/directory-i-cant-write: Permission denied We now have a directory I can't write with contents I can't read that I can't move atomically. I can, however, achieve the same effect non-atomically by changing permissions, making the new directory, using ln to create the new links, and changing permissions. (Left as an exercise to the reader) . and .. are special cased already, so I don't particularly buy that it is intuitive that if I can't write a directory I can't "change .." which is what the source suggests. Is there any reason for this besides it being the perceived correct behavior by the author of the code? Is there anything bad that can happen if we let people atomically move directories (that they can't write) between directories that they can write?

    Read the article

  • read and write permission for FAT32 partition in Ubuntu

    - by Dean
    This is a strange problem. I have the following partition table Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sda1 * 1 13 102400 7 HPFS/NTFS Partition 1 does not end on cylinder boundary. /dev/sda2 13 5737 45978624 7 HPFS/NTFS /dev/sda3 5738 10600 39062047+ 83 Linux /dev/sda4 10601 19457 71143852+ 5 Extended /dev/sda5 10601 11208 4883728+ 82 Linux swap / Solaris /dev/sda6 11209 15033 30720000 b W95 FAT32 /dev/sda7 15033 19457 35537920 7 HPFS/NTFS I dual boot Win7 (sda2) and Ubuntu (sda3) and wanted to use the FAT23 partition to share files across two OS's. I followed some online tutorial and have done these: sudo mkdir /media/FAT32 sudo chmod 777 /media/FAT32 sudo mount /dev/sda6/ /media/FAT32 after I mounted the file, I can only read but not be able to write to it. I checked the file permission, it becomes: drwxr-xr-x but after I unmounted the it then becomes drwxrwxrwx and I can read and write to it. very strange. I don't know where I've down wrong. Cheers.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19  | Next Page >