×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Strange Ubuntu/Vista Compatibility Bug, Solved

timothy posted more than 5 years ago | from the love-it-when-a-plan-comes-together dept.

Bug 140

Walter Vos writes "Since I've been running Vista and Ubuntu in dual boot with a shared FAT32 partition for my personal folders, I've been seeing some strange compatibility issues between these two operating systems. Somehow Vista locks the folders on the FAT32 partition that are used for folders like Documents, Downloads, etc. A blogpost I wrote gives a detailed description of the problem and a fix for it."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

140 comments

Ubuntu (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24609499)

Can suck my dick.

Mod parent down - it's not true! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24609591)

It actually cannot suck dick. That's my main issue with it. I downloaded and installed Ubuntu with the full expectation of some dick sucking and it never came to pass. What the fuck is that about? You, sir, are a liar and a fraud.

Re:Mod parent down - it's not true! (3, Funny)

teh moges (875080) | more than 5 years ago | (#24609665)

Ubuntu can easily handle a FAT16, but has trouble handling a FAT32. It needs more practice I suppose.

Re:Mod parent down - it's not true! (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24609673)

Well, at least it doesn't fuck you in the ass like Vista does.

Re:Mod parent down - it's not true! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24610371)

TinyLimp Vista has never done that for me.

Re:Mod parent down - it's not true! (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24610523)

Vista fucks you in the ass, and Ubuntu fails to suck your dick...

Good thing I stick to good ol' DOS, the only OS that won't sexually abuse you, it seems.

Re:Mod parent down - it's not true! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24611009)

No, Ubuntu is designed to rape pussies.

Re:Mod parent down - it's not true! (2, Funny)

Alsee (515537) | more than 5 years ago | (#24612139)

I've gotten used to putting up with all sorts of nasty behavior from Windows over the years, and I guess I could eventually reluctantly learn to get used to the ass fucking.... but I had to dump Vista when it insisted on shitting in my mouth after each ass fucking.

-

FAT32 (4, Interesting)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 5 years ago | (#24609519)

NTFS-3G works pretty well. I'm not sure FAT32 is really necessary any more.

Re:FAT32 (5, Funny)

duckInferno (1275100) | more than 5 years ago | (#24609607)

Stay away from FATMAN239. It nuked my hard drive.

bumper upper (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24610211)

c'mon mods, that is reasonably geeky funny in a twisted way.

Re:FAT32 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24613567)

How about Tongue of the Fatman (http://www.mobygames.com/game/dos/tongue-of-the-fatman). That was when fighting games were original...

Re:FAT32 (2, Insightful)

4D6963 (933028) | more than 5 years ago | (#24609663)

ntfs-3g worked pretty well for me, except for I/O intensive applications. aMule with all its I/O on a NTFS partition of VMware with all the virtual machine's file on a NTFS partition as well were pretty slow. Actually I think VMware was so slow that 99% of the CPU was actually taken up by ntfs-3g, meaning VMware was crawling.

Re:FAT32 (5, Interesting)

MindlessAutomata (1282944) | more than 5 years ago | (#24610099)

I kept all my mp3s on an NTFS partition, and it made amarok incredibly slow for searching through files and even listing them when I wanted to expand a tree. It, of course, also was using up a ton of cpu power. Other intensive programs were causing me other problems, mostly more cpu usage quirks.

NTFS-3g is not perfect and I'd recommend steering clear of relying on NTFS on linux for heavy or day-today usage. I haven't used ubuntu on windows but I can imagine it would give a negative impression due to performance issues. For pulling off the occasion file off another partition, though, it works well.

When I moved all my mp3s to an ext3 partition, all the problems with amarok went away instantly.

Re:FAT32 (3, Informative)

coolsnowmen (695297) | more than 5 years ago | (#24610361)

I kept all my mp3s on an NTFS partition, and it made amarok incredibly slow for searching through files and even listing them when I wanted to expand a tree. It, of course, also was using up a ton of cpu power. Other intensive programs were causing me other problems, mostly more cpu usage quirks.

I found the default database backend slow, so switching to a better DB could be the solution. Even if your files are on NTFS, try having a postgres DB backend(on your fs of choice) and it should speed up your library searching.

Re: Ubuntu and NTFS (4, Informative)

szaka (1061180) | more than 5 years ago | (#24613129)

NTFS-3G changes rapidly and historically Ubuntu included an old, lower performing version of the NTFS-3G driver. However the one in Ubuntu 8.04 should be ok.

Amarok has a documented performance issue with NTFS-3G: http://ntfs-3g.org/support.html#dd [ntfs-3g.org]

The NTFS-3G web site has many tips what could be the problem for high CPU usage: http://ntfs-3g.org/support.html#cpu100 [ntfs-3g.org]

Sometimes NTFS defragmentation makes a magic.

The focus of the NTFS-3G development is reliability and functionality over performance. The performance optimizations started only recently and the current development versions perform close or sometimes surprisingly even better than ext3.

Re:FAT32 (1)

ThePhilips (752041) | more than 5 years ago | (#24612907)

IO is always slow. But there are some tricks to make it faster. But most of the performance tricks lose their advantages with FUSE (e.g. mmap'ed IO or direct IO or raw io, whatever sales call it today). VMware uses bunch of the tricks to actually speed up it's IO and it really works well with normal in-kernel file systems. But not with FUSE.

Re:FAT32 (5, Informative)

niteice (793961) | more than 5 years ago | (#24609675)

There's a couple of ext3 drivers for Windows (one open-source, one not) that also work pretty well, so you can go both ways.

Re:FAT32 (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24609783)

As far as I know they're only ext2 drivers. Of coarse, you can usually mount ext3 as ext2 without any issues.

Re:FAT32 (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24610033)

As far as I know they're only ext2 drivers. Of coarse, you can usually mount ext3 as ext2 without any issues.

What keeps people from implementing ext3 support for Windows? The Linux source code is obviously available, so are Windows ext2 drivers reimplementations that aren't using existing code? Or is there some deeper problem?

Re:FAT32 (5, Insightful)

kiddygrinder (605598) | more than 5 years ago | (#24610225)

ext2 works pretty well for ext3 drives so they don't care enough to do it. Anyone who does care about ext3 that much i'd guess probably doesn't care that much about windows.

IFS Kit; Vista 64 Test Mode (4, Informative)

tepples (727027) | more than 5 years ago | (#24610437)

What keeps people from implementing ext3 support for Windows? The Linux source code is obviously available, so are Windows ext2 drivers reimplementations that aren't using existing code? Or is there some deeper problem?

For a while, Microsoft once charged roughly $1,000 for the "IFS Kit" used to develop installable file system drivers. To work around this, programs such as "Explore2fs" had to act like WinRAR and 7-Zip, where you don't really mount a partition but you can still drag files in and out. (The price appears to have dropped since then.) For another thing, 64-bit versions of Windows Vista put an annoying "Test Mode" banner in all four corners of the desktop if the user installs a device driver that hasn't been signed by a publisher who pays an annual fee of at least $200 to a commercial certificate authority trusted by Microsoft.

Re:IFS Kit; Vista 64 Test Mode (2, Insightful)

ozphx (1061292) | more than 5 years ago | (#24611143)

At least $200! Thats almost two developer hours of money!

Pretty certain you can chuck whatever cert you want in the trusted root store / disable this behaviour.

Re:IFS Kit; Vista 64 Test Mode (2, Insightful)

tepples (727027) | more than 5 years ago | (#24612845)

At least $200! Thats almost two developer hours of money!

In what city of what state/province of what country?

Re:IFS Kit; Vista 64 Test Mode (1)

westlake (615356) | more than 5 years ago | (#24612543)

64-bit versions of Windows Vista put an annoying "Test Mode" banner in all four corners of the desktop if the user installs a device driver that hasn't been signed by a publisher who pays an annual fee of at least $200 to a commercial certificate authority trusted by Microsoft.
.

$200 to certify a driver for something as elemental as a filing system seems reasonable enough.

Re:IFS Kit; Vista 64 Test Mode (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 5 years ago | (#24612719)

$200 to certify a driver for something as elemental as a filing system seems reasonable enough.

The only reason that one would get away with it is because ext3fs (along with the rest of Linux) is GPLv2, not GPLv3. Under GPLv3, anybody who distributes copies of the installable file system would have to distribute Installation Information, and as I read the GPLv3, this would involve buying a certificate for each recipient of the source code.

Re:IFS Kit; Vista 64 Test Mode (1)

silent_artichoke (973182) | more than 5 years ago | (#24612655)

I had to do the registry change to get an unsigned driver to load in 64-bit Vista Ultimate. The driver was for a Virtual CD/DVD drive so I could mount ISOs. I have never seen this banner you mention, and I have been running that machine for a year. In fact, I reloaded the machine once and had to install that same driver. Do you have a source for this, or did I get lucky? I would love to get a screenshot of it and set it as my co-worker's wallpaper.

Re:FAT32 (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24609841)

so you can go both ways.

You see? More proof that Linux users are homosexuals.

Re:FAT32 (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24610015)

No, that would be bisexual. Dumbass.

Re:FAT32 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24610233)

I run one and I'm quite happy with it, with one provisio - if your system (when in linux mode) suffers a hard-shutdown, the windows driver won't be able to read the drive until you've booted into linux and run fsck on the partition.

Re:FAT32 (2, Informative)

Daengbo (523424) | more than 5 years ago | (#24611137)

Oddly enough, there's the exact corollary in Linux. Mounting NTFS filesystems often fails because they weren't unmounted properly in Windows. The solution is ... to boot into Windows and mount the filesystem.

Re:FAT32 (4, Informative)

Ruie (30480) | more than 5 years ago | (#24610111)

I think he would have the same problem with a ntfs drive.

The issue is that his Linux user setup and Windows user setup are different.
So when he mounts the partition all files are owned by root (as shown on the screen), and some files have public permissions turned off - a reasonable thing.

Thus what he needs to do is specify the owner of the files using uid=value
option in /etc/fstab (uid value can be found via "getent passwd", it is numeric).

For more info read "man mount" carefully.

Re:FAT32 (1)

AmonTheMetalhead (1277044) | more than 5 years ago | (#24612943)

Nope, FAT lacks the "owner" principle, the issue here is the 'System' bit. These are the file attributes FAT knows: - Read - Write - System

Re:FAT32 (2, Insightful)

RupW (515653) | more than 5 years ago | (#24613881)

These are the file attributes FAT knows:
- Read
- Write
- System

No, it's

  • r - read only
  • a - archive (set when the file is modified, i.e. can use as a simple 'needs backup' flag)
  • s - system
  • h - hidden

Re:FAT32 (1)

Ruie (30480) | more than 5 years ago | (#24613897)

Nope, FAT lacks the "owner" principle, the issue here is the 'System' bit.

These are the file attributes FAT knows:
- Read
- Write
- System

Yes, but when you mount FAT in Linux the files are assigned an owner - which is is either specified via options or, in their absence, is the user running mount.

For external drives bigger than 2 GB (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 5 years ago | (#24610369)

NTFS-3G works pretty well. I'm not sure FAT32 is really necessary any more.

Unless you have an SDHC card that you're sneakernetting between your PC and a digital camera, or you have an external hard drive that you're sneakernetting between a Windows or Ubuntu PC and either a Mac or an Xbox 360. Cameras, Macs, and game consoles tend not to work with NTFS out of the box.

Re:FAT32 (2, Informative)

macshit (157376) | more than 5 years ago | (#24610981)

NTFS-3G works pretty well. I'm not sure FAT32 is really necessary any more.

FAT may suck, but it's the only thing understood by a lot of embedded software like BIOSes, device firmware, etc...

Indeed, for that reason it seems like FAT may very well be more useful than NTFS. FAT will probably stay around for quite a while as a "braindead, but simple and widespread" exchange format, but the only excuse for NTFS is windows.

Re:FAT32 (1)

Bert64 (520050) | more than 5 years ago | (#24612041)

Except that FAT craps out with large files, and things like dvd images are becoming increasingly common these days.
Having a new universally supported FS would be good for everyone, but Microsoft will never support a third party fs unless absolutely forced to, and anything they make themselves will be closed and proprietary and thus useless as a universal transfer system.

On the other hand, UFS is good, Linux, OSX, Solaris and BSD all support it out of the box (tho admittedly linux's support is quite poor).

Re:FAT32 (2, Informative)

Mattsson (105422) | more than 5 years ago | (#24612171)

I've had NTFS-G3 totally destroy two NTFS partitions with the Vista version of NTFS 3.1
This seem to differ a bit from the XP version of NTFS 3.1

As my grandmother used to say (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24609625)

My grandmother had a saying: 'blue and green should never be seen.' That's really all I have to say on the design of that blog.

Re:As my grandmother used to say (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24609735)

I thought was supposed to be "red and green should never be seen?"

Re:As my grandmother used to say (3, Funny)

SeekerDarksteel (896422) | more than 5 years ago | (#24611279)

Let's just make it red, blue, AND green should never been seen.

Hey, did it just get awfully dark in here?

Re:As my grandmother used to say (1)

Bert64 (520050) | more than 5 years ago | (#24612035)

So you're saying everything should be red?

Re:As my grandmother used to say (1)

Hucko (998827) | more than 5 years ago | (#24613805)

The whole saying is 'blue and green should never be seen without something in between.' 'tis a fashion thing, I personally disagree with. However, I have only a few people coming to me for fashion advice.

Re:As my grandmother used to say (1)

Hucko (998827) | more than 5 years ago | (#24613779)

I'd suggest she take a walk out bush (the terrain not the bloke). In heavily wooded areas you get... blue and green. If it works in nature, the only things stopping it working in production is incompetence and prejudice. However, you lead me to believe that she is no longer using that saying... regards.

Just Delete Vista. (-1, Troll)

twitter (104583) | more than 5 years ago | (#24609693)

That is all you need to do. Run XP, if you must have some awefull Winblows app, in a VM Most applications work with Wine. Vista is not needed and never will be.

Re:Just Delete Vista. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24609849)

ali-baba the computer [slashdot.org] is gone!!

MOD PARENT UP (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24609979)

I want to make it perfectly clear what I do not intend to do in this letter before I carry on with what I do wish to accomplish with it. In the first place, if Twitter honestly believes that some of my points are not valid, I would love to get some specific feedback from him. To those adversarial hermits who think that it's perfectly safe to drink and drive, know this: Twitter is guilty of at least one criminal offense. In addition, he frequently exhibits less formal criminal behavior such as deliberate and even gleeful cruelty, explosive behavior, and a burning desire to exercise control through indirect coercion or through psychological pressure or manipulation. He is not interested in what is true and what is false or in what is good and what is evil. In fact, those distinctions have no meaning to him whatsoever. The only thing that has any meaning to Twitter is narcissism. Why? To turn that question around, whatever happened to Twitter's sense of humanity? The most appealing theory has to do with the way that Twitter seizes every opportunity to poke someone's eyes out. I cannot believe this colossal clownishness. Any sane person knows that if Twitter wanted to, he could threaten national security. He could turn a deaf ear to need and suffering. And he could rot out the foundations of our religious, moral, and political values. We must not allow Twitter to do any of these.

Twitter promises that if we give him and his provocateurs additional powers, he'll guard us from ill-natured nitwits. My question, however is, Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? -- Who will guard the guards? Since I don't know him that well, I'll have to be a bit presumptuous when I say that Twitter's contemptible quips instill distrust and thereby create a need for his contemptuous views. News of this deviousness must spread like wildfire if we are ever to mention a bit about gormless dopeheads such as Twitter. His skills are generally used to exploit, abuse, and exert power. That concept can be extended, mutatis mutandis, to the way that Twitter is typical of argumentative gasbags in his wild invocations to the irrational, the magic, and the fantastic to dramatize his views.

Many people are convinced that the most significant aspect of Twitter's mentality and its lack of refinement is the closeness of Twitter's way of thinking in general to the way that the most sick yokels you'll ever see think in particular. I can't comment on that but I can say that as he matures emotionally he'll eventually grow out of his present way of thinking and come to realize that I welcome his comments. However, he needs to realize that I could go on for pages listing innumerable examples of his slaphappy announcements and featherbrained zingers. I have already written enough, surely, to convince you that we can divide Twitter's metanarratives into three categories: empty-headed, uncivilized, and deceitful. When one looks at the increasing influence of fanaticism in our culture one sees that Twitter's signature is on everything. So how come his fingerprints are nowhere to be found? The answer is obvious if you understand that Twitter would have us believe that he can make all of our problems go away merely by sprinkling some sort of magic, pink, pixie dust over everything that he considers wayward or vitriolic. Not surprisingly, his evidence for that completely nettlesome claim is top-heavy with anonymous sources and, to put it mildly, he has a checkered track record for accuracy. I think it would be more accurate for Twitter to say that the real question here is not, "Why does he insist on boring holes in the hull of the boat in which he himself is also a passenger?". The real question is rather, "How long shall there continue short-sighted dummkopfs to vend and gloomy spouters to gulp so low a piece of McCarthyism as his perorations?" This is not a question that we should run away from. Rather, it is something that needs to be addressed quickly and directly because if I withheld my feelings on this matter, I'd be no less repugnant than Twitter. To recap the main points made in this letter: 1) Twitter doesn't reck one whit about how others might feel, 2) besides being blatantly sexist towards the female gender, Twitter is thoroughly impertinent, and 3) widespread blackguardism is the price we'd pay for making "semiprofessionalized" a dirty word.

coincidence? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24610249)

Twitter is typical of argumentative gasbags in his wild invocations to the irrational, the magic, and the fantastic to dramatize his views.

well, I know where [pakin.org] you generated this, but it's just damn scary that most of it is factually correct...

Just Delete The Egomaniac. (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24609983)

Hmm, I'm having a problem with permissions between Vista and Ubuntu. What should I do?

Adopt a philosophy of ideological inflexibility, intolerance, ignorance, immaturity, and narcissism?

...or...

Run a shell script or two?

Decisions, decisions...

crappy site (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24609711)

Maybe if your crappy site actually rendered properly in browsers like... say... konqueror, we might give a damn...

Back to vista for you, for shame.

you are hollow, (0)

rvJJax (1165589) | more than 5 years ago | (#24609727)

you cannot life in two world, because if you do, i will destroy you.

BANKAI!

for the sake of topic: dual boot is lame.

Re:you are hollow, (1)

Psychotria (953670) | more than 5 years ago | (#24610011)

I am wondering why dual boot is "lame"... I dual boot for a couple of reasons. A) For games; B) For Windows apps that I need for work (although, I avoid this now by having XP in vmWare); C) For cross-platform debugging/test (again, vmWare to the rescue); and D) my microscope software, which, alas I can't get to find the scope using vmWare... I have no idea why.

I have 3 machines at home plus my laptop. And I still dual boot on my main machine. Living life in two worlds aint that bad.

Re:you are hollow, (4, Insightful)

grantek (979387) | more than 5 years ago | (#24610177)

It's lame because games should work under linux. It's not necessarily you being lame, it's either game developers being lame by not porting their games, Windows being lame that it's hard for the Wine crew to implement it with the exactness needed for games, or both, if the lame games are using bits of Windows that are lame when stuff like OpenGL could help.

It's lame that people feel like they're being held hostage by an operating system that they don't otherwise want, and it's lame that MS is making money off that. If you actually want Windows for one reason or another, then it's not lame at all.

Re:you are hollow, (1)

thephotoman (791574) | more than 5 years ago | (#24610461)

This is why I really think a version of XNA ported to Mono would be totally awesome. Ideally, it'd allow binary compatibility between games written against that API on any platform.

Of course, this is probably a pipe dream.

Lack of Free (or even shared-source) drivers (2, Insightful)

tepples (727027) | more than 5 years ago | (#24610487)

It's not necessarily you being lame, it's either game developers being lame by not porting their games

Up until very recently, it was also video card manufacturers being lame by not making OpenGL drivers for Linux that the community can help debug. But ATI, one of the two makers of chipsets for video cards,[1] plans to stop being lame [linux.com]. And some people would claim that it's distribution maintainers being lame by not providing more thorough binary compatibility across multiple families of GNU/Linux distributions. ("What's an LSB again?")

[1] Intel GMA is not available on a card.

Re:Lack of Free (or even shared-source) drivers (1)

bhtooefr (649901) | more than 5 years ago | (#24611313)

Actually, I'm pretty sure you can get a GMA chipset on an ISA or PCI card.

But, you also get a processor, and RAM, on that same card, and they're designed to run on a passive ISA or PCI backplane. ;)

Re:you are hollow, (0, Troll)

rvJJax (1165589) | more than 5 years ago | (#24610351)

because this is /. ? hellooo ... is this still a /. ?

anyway, there is nothing wrong with that, it's just, hmmm i have seen many people doing that. and most of them is -you know-, using GNU/Linux to look cool "hey i'am hacker-wannabe, look at me with the cube". and yeah most of them use not-legal-aka-pirate Windows, and other .exe software.

so, since you are hollow too, i will release your soul. BANKAI!

Re:you are hollow, (1)

dosius (230542) | more than 5 years ago | (#24610389)

And of course when Linux is finally desktop-ready they'll see it as too mainstream for them and move on to BSD, Minix or Solaris.

As some already have.

-uso.

Re:you are hollow, (1)

rvJJax (1165589) | more than 5 years ago | (#24610449)

yeah, :) you are so right. i though i'm just the only one who think like that.

i planning to move to OpenBSD, just after this project done.

just, wait for it.

-rv77ax

I suspsect that... (3, Insightful)

Psychotria (953670) | more than 5 years ago | (#24609853)

if the owner/group permissions were set properly in fstab an easier solution would prevail

Not a vista bug (1)

phorm (591458) | more than 5 years ago | (#24609887)

This isn't a "Vista" bug, as I've seen it happen frequently on a dual boot machine that is only XP+Ubuntu (no Vista)

I ran into this not that long ago and was really stuck scratching my head for awhile, as the fstab settings were definitely correct. However, after a little "chmod -R" magic on the entire FAT32 partition, it reset the recalcitrant permissions and everything worked fine.

Re:Not a vista bug (4, Informative)

Qzukk (229616) | more than 5 years ago | (#24610199)

It's not a bug, it's old knowledge getting flushed out of the general awareness of the public. FAT has a read-only bit and Linux knows about it, it's in there along with the system and hidden file bits:

#define ATTR_RO 1 /* read-only */

(linux/msdos_fs.h)

Re:Not a vista bug (1)

Chris Pimlott (16212) | more than 5 years ago | (#24610905)

Glad to see I'm wasn't the only one scratching my head about the claim that FAT32 doesn't support the read-only attribute.

Damn kids these days, don't remember having to use ATTRIB...

Re:Not a vista bug (1)

phorm (591458) | more than 5 years ago | (#24613811)

I seem to remember that being supported back as far as the old DOS days and FAT16.

However, if it were a read-only set with something like "attrib", then one shouldn't be able to edit these files in windows either. Seems to be more an issue with the way the 'vfat' module interprets some FAT32 dirs.

Re:Not a vista bug (1)

AmonTheMetalhead (1277044) | more than 5 years ago | (#24612989)

Kids these days with their fancy filesystems... The general computing knowledge of the current generation is woofully limited, oh well, better for us older fellas, more phish to catch. Hell, kids these days don't even know Vista still has a cli.... This is *NOT* a bug in Ubuntu or linux in general, it's Microsoft violating it's own filesystem spec to have neat tricks in a crappy OS

Re:Not a vista bug (4, Informative)

greg1104 (461138) | more than 5 years ago | (#24610565)

This started in XP actually. The problem is that Microsoft sets the read-only attribute on the special folders that get custom views. See http://support.microsoft.com/kb/326549 [microsoft.com] for information about the root cause of the problem reported on this blog. Fixing it on the Windows side requires one to go all old-school and use attrib; cracked me up.

Linux newbie finds FAT32 file perms don't work... (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24609893)

... gets page linked from slashdot.

Well, at least I adblock.

Re:Linux newbie finds FAT32 file perms don't work. (1)

A.K.A_Magnet (860822) | more than 5 years ago | (#24610001)

Yeah seriously, why the fuck is this on Slashdot? I'm not the "stuff that matters" whiner type but either timothy never used a Linux distro and thinks this is newsworthy, or this is the slowest news day ever :).

Re:Linux newbie finds FAT32 file perms don't work. (1, Offtopic)

saturnism (177882) | more than 5 years ago | (#24610075)

that's it, i'm outa here. of all the years i stood by slashdot, this post just did it for me.

good bye news for non nerds
good bye dupes
good bye first posts
good bye trolls
good bye horrible commenting system and the stupid slider

Re:Linux newbie finds FAT32 file perms don't work. (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24610765)

You obviously never really did fit in here. I mean, a true slashdotter would have titled his post "Last post!"

Re:Linux newbie finds FAT32 file perms don't work. (5, Funny)

jamie (78724) | more than 5 years ago | (#24610207)

either timothy never used a Linux distro and thinks this is newsworthy, or this is the slowest news day ever

Timothy was last seen putting Ubuntu on an XO. He's been using Linux at least since I met him in 1999.

It's August, every day is a slow news day :)

Re:Linux newbie finds FAT32 file perms don't work. (1)

SirLurksAlot (1169039) | more than 5 years ago | (#24610265)

Ha, I was so thinking the same thing. The gist of this "story" is that they had a problem getting Vista and Ubuntu to work together (*mock gasp* I've never heard of such a thing!) and then proceeded to fix it. *yawn* To top it all off the linked article is a blog post from the submitter. Give me a break.

Re:Linux newbie finds FAT32 file perms don't work. (1)

ROMRIX (912502) | more than 5 years ago | (#24610483)

Yeah seriously, why the fuck is this on Slashdot? I'm not the "stuff that matters" whiner type but either timothy never used a Linux distro and thinks this is newsworthy, or this is the slowest news day ever :).

If you think it's slow now, just wait. Tomorrow we're discussing "Ubuntu, 'Where's root!'"

Ubuntu is Linux? (1)

incripshin (580256) | more than 5 years ago | (#24609973)

Apparently, there is a common belief that Ubuntu and Linux are the same. Actually, there are many types of Linux operating systems like Gentoo, Slackware, Fedora, or SUSE. So Ubuntu => Linux, but !(Linux => Ubuntu). For example, I have run into this issue (not bug) using Slackware, Gentoo, and I think also OpenBSD. My solution is easier, though: stay out of 'My Documents'.

Re:Ubuntu is Linux? (1)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 5 years ago | (#24610269)

But Ubuntu is the most used distros and it can be easily said that it is a Ubuntu bug rather than testing default installs of Gentoo/Slackware/SuSE/Fedora/Arch/etc.

Re:Ubuntu is Linux? (1)

AceofSpades19 (1107875) | more than 5 years ago | (#24610319)

well then I think Linus should mark every kernel bug as a specific ubuntu bug instead of testing all the distros, because obviously no one cares about the rest of them

Re:Ubuntu is Linux? (1)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 5 years ago | (#24610347)

But which is easier to test for someone who isn't a kernel hacker, A) a default Ubuntu or B) the latest kernel. But what about compile-time flags, who's kernel tree, etc. By basing it on a standard Ubuntu install, the average person can still report kernel bugs without messing around with kernel hacking.

tell me if i'm wrong (1)

nawcom (941663) | more than 5 years ago | (#24610139)

But this probably isn't that complicated. For year and years in strange situations or another, when files were placed on a fat32 partition in windows in certain conditions, users in Linux couldn't freely access the file unless the partition was mounted with "-o umask=000". In fact I just bought a shitty thumb drive, stuck it in my laptop running Slack and the hotplugging daemon (yes... slackware has that oooOOOOOoh) picked it up and mounted it. I opened it up and saw they had this E3 something or another windows app on it, so I tried to delete it. Nope, permission issues. So I manually unmounted and mounted with umask=000, and i could delete it fine.

I did RTFA, and I must say this is the dumbest post ever. If any fs coders can figure out what issue this person was having, I'm curious, for it doesn't sound like anything new at all.

Normal, expected behaviour, non issue (1)

AmonTheMetalhead (1277044) | more than 5 years ago | (#24612917)

What the fuck is the issue here? This is "normal" behaviour, Windows Vista sets the System bit (don't ask) on the directories, and that way they get mounted -ro for everyone but 'root'. Ever heard of the command "attrib" on DOS? Bug my ass.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...