ANN: NTFS 2.0.1 for kernel 2.5.7 released
Padraig Brady
IMHO you usually would not want to execute stuff off NTFS, and
if you do you can always just explicitly invoke using wine like:
`wine /ntfs/lookout.exe`
To have all files executable breaks stuff like:
midnight commander (won't open executable files)
ls colorizing
shell tab completion
...
see:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=100143416100009&r=1&w=2
I think the default should be
rx for directories and r for files
Padraig.
Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> NTFS 2.0.1 for kernel 2.5.7 is now available. This is a minor update,
> mainly to allow binaries to be executed by changing the default
> permissions on files to include the executable bit. This feature has
> often been requested by wine users so here it is. (-:
>
> Sorry for the quick succession of releases but the web server hosting
> the 2.0.0 patches is now off line so I had to move the location and I
> used the opportunity to release this minor update.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Anton
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majo...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Anton Altaparmakov
> Is this a good default?
I don't see what's wrong with that. It follows the logic of least
surprise. In Windows all files are executable as there is no way to
distinguish executables from non-executables due to lack of executable
bit. NTFS on Linux has no way of telling the difference either and hence
it makes sense to allow execution of all files.
If you don't like it, use -o noexec,fmask=0111 and you will not have any
files being executable.
> IMHO you usually would not want to execute stuff off NTFS, and
> if you do you can always just explicitly invoke using wine like:
> `wine /ntfs/lookout.exe`
No you couldn't.
> To have all files executable breaks stuff like:
> midnight commander (won't open executable files)
Ouch, that is plain stupid... mc should be fixed. I open executables all
the time and mc should automatically fire up a hexeditor.
> ls colorizing
I like green files. (-;
> shell tab completion
Heh?!? Works for me. Fix your shell settings.
> ...
Like what?
> see:
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=100143416100009&r=1&w=2
Read it. I still don't see any reason for not having x on files by
default.
> I think the default should be
> rx for directories and r for files
If you think so just use fmask to clear the x bit and be happy.
I guess if more people complain I can change the default fmask to be 0177
instead of 0077 but I want to see more complaints first. I personally find
the being able to execute behaviour better as I run things off the ntfs
partitions...
Best regards,
Anton
--
Anton Altaparmakov <aia21 at cam.ac.uk> (replace at with @)
Linux NTFS maintainer / WWW: http://linux-ntfs.sf.net/
ICQ: 8561279 / WWW: http://www-stu.christs.cam.ac.uk/~aia21/
Padraig Brady
> On Fri, 29 Mar 2002, Padraig Brady wrote:
>
>>Is this a good default?
>
>
> I don't see what's wrong with that. It follows the logic of least
> surprise. In Windows all files are executable as there is no way to
> distinguish executables from non-executables due to lack of executable
> bit. NTFS on Linux has no way of telling the difference either and hence
> it makes sense to allow execution of all files.
>
> If you don't like it, use -o noexec,fmask=0111 and you will not have any
> files being executable.
>
>
>>IMHO you usually would not want to execute stuff off NTFS, and
>>if you do you can always just explicitly invoke using wine like:
>>`wine /ntfs/lookout.exe`
>
>
> No you couldn't.
>
why not? wine should be changed to allow this if
it is a limitation with it.
>>To have all files executable breaks stuff like:
>>midnight commander (won't open executable files)
>
>
> Ouch, that is plain stupid... mc should be fixed. I open executables all
> the time and mc should automatically fire up a hexeditor.
Well by not opening I meant it tries to run them
which is sensible really. I would guess any unix
filemanager is going to have some issues with all
files having executable bits set.
Isn't there some kludge for vfat where it marks
*.{com,exe,bat} as executable?
>
>>ls colorizing
>
>
> I like green files. (-;
Well I hate them :-)
Also coloring is wrong in mc and probably other things.
>
>>shell tab completion
>
>
> Heh?!? Works for me. Fix your shell settings.
>
>
>>...
>
>
> Like what?
>
>
>>see:
>>http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=100143416100009&r=1&w=2
>
>
> Read it. I still don't see any reason for not having x on files by
> default.
>
>
>>I think the default should be
>>rx for directories and r for files
>
>
> If you think so just use fmask to clear the x bit and be happy.
>
> I guess if more people complain I can change the default fmask to be 0177
> instead of 0077 but I want to see more complaints first. I personally find
> the being able to execute behaviour better as I run things off the ntfs
> partitions...
>
> Best regards,
>
> Anton
-
Richard B. Johnson
It used to be, under DOS, that ".COM" files were loaded and
"executed" even if they were text. Then, when the ".EXE" file
came out, it would be executed if the first two bytes were 'MZ' so
you could make a text file with the first two characters "MZ" and
save it as "CRASH.EXE" and that's what it would do. All ".BAT"
files were assumed to be interpreted by 'COMMAND.COM', the "shell",
as scripts. This means that you can make a ".BAT" file called
"COMMAND.BAT", with interesting results.
When FAT-32, NTFS, VFAT, Windozes file-system(s) were developed
all bets are off. Long file-names are the result of a 'container-file'
concept and anything goes.
So the only way to guess at these file's execution capabilities
is to read the name --and it's a bad guess.
If the files are NOT set to 'executable' as read by Linux, then samba
will not work. For the files to be visible to WIN/Clients, they
must have all bits set. This 'feature' can be used to make DOS/Win
files temporarily off-limits to WIN/Clients (like during a backup).
Cheers,
Dick Johnson
Penguin : Linux version 2.4.18 on an i686 machine (797.90 BogoMips).
Windows-2000/Professional isn't.
Richard B. Johnson
> On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 09:13:38AM -0500, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
> > If the files are NOT set to 'executable' as read by Linux, then samba
> > will not work. For the files to be visible to WIN/Clients, they
> > must have all bits set. This 'feature' can be used to make DOS/Win
> > files temporarily off-limits to WIN/Clients (like during a backup).
> >
>
> Since when?
>
> None of the of the data files on my samba server are marked executable, and
> all are readable.
>
> You probably have "map archive = yes" in mind, but that will *not*
> deny access if
> the executable bit is set or not...
>
> This is looking at the manual for smb.conf in 2.2.3a.
>
> Mike
>
Try it before you complain. I have samba servers all over the place.
If you have a DOS or VFAT file-system mounted and it is accessed by
samba as a "share", only the files that are executable will be seen
by the clients. Check it out.