FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Debian > Debian User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 03-10-2009, 03:54 PM
"Masatran / Deepak, R."
 
Default Ext3 for flash drive

Recently, I re-partitioned my flash drive. I made one FAT32 partition, and
one Ext3 partition. The problem is that when I transfer files from my laptop
to my work computer, the UIDs on the Ext3 partition are used for the
permissions, so I am not able to access the data. How can I fix this?

Both computers run Debian Lenny. The laptop runs Sawfish while the work
computer runs Gnome. I manually mount the flash drive in Sawfish, and I have
a FSTAB entry to allow this without Sudo. Gnome does an automatic mount. I
don't have superuser privilege on the work computer.

I am willing to use non-Ext3 filesystems, I just want RWX-RWX-RWX-style file
permissions.

--
Masatran / Deepak, R. <http://research.iiit.ac.in/~masatran/>


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 03-10-2009, 06:23 PM
Jochen Schulz
 
Default Ext3 for flash drive

Masatran / Deepak, R.:
>
> Recently, I re-partitioned my flash drive. I made one FAT32 partition, and
> one Ext3 partition.

Is ext3 on a flash medium really a good idea? At least cheap flash
drives probably don't have smart wear levelling.

> The problem is that when I transfer files from my laptop
> to my work computer, the UIDs on the Ext3 partition are used for the
> permissions, so I am not able to access the data. How can I fix this?

You can't unless the UIDs on both systems are equal. As far as I know,
all filesystems with UNIX-style permissions only store UIDs, not
usernames.

J.
--
If politics is the blind leading the blind, entertainment is the fucked-
up leading the hypnotised.
[Agree] [Disagree]
<http://www.slowlydownward.com/NODATA/data_enter2.html>
 
Old 03-10-2009, 09:42 PM
"Benjamin M. A'Lee"
 
Default Ext3 for flash drive

On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 08:23:43PM +0100, Jochen Schulz wrote:
> Masatran / Deepak, R.:
> >
> > Recently, I re-partitioned my flash drive. I made one FAT32 partition, and
> > one Ext3 partition.
>
> Is ext3 on a flash medium really a good idea? At least cheap flash
> drives probably don't have smart wear levelling.

And FAT32 is better?

--
Benjamin M. A'Lee || mail: bma@subvert.org.uk
web: http://subvert.org.uk/~bma/ || gpg: 0xBB6D2FA0
"If I can't dance, I don't want to be part of your revolution." -- Emma Goldman


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 03-11-2009, 04:19 AM
Mark Allums
 
Default Ext3 for flash drive

Benjamin M. A'Lee wrote:

On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 08:23:43PM +0100, Jochen Schulz wrote:

Masatran / Deepak, R.:

Recently, I re-partitioned my flash drive. I made one FAT32 partition, and
one Ext3 partition.

Is ext3 on a flash medium really a good idea? At least cheap flash
drives probably don't have smart wear levelling.


And FAT32 is better?




Let's us all start a movement, an exFat on Linux movement. exFat is a
relatively new FS that is designed specifically for removable drives.
It is superficially an "extended FAT", while the underlying bits are
new. MS has added it to Vista with SP1, and to XP with a hotfix.


Everyone should hope someone competent takes the time to port it to
Linux, with full write capability. It is exactly what OP needs.


In the meantime, for removable drives 32G and under, one should probably
stick to FAT32/vfat.


Mark Allums


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 03-11-2009, 10:38 AM
Jens Van Broeckhoven
 
Default Ext3 for flash drive

Masatran / Deepak, R. wrote:

Recently, I re-partitioned my flash drive. I made one FAT32 partition, and
one Ext3 partition. The problem is that when I transfer files from my laptop
to my work computer, the UIDs on the Ext3 partition are used for the
permissions, so I am not able to access the data. How can I fix this?

Both computers run Debian Lenny. The laptop runs Sawfish while the work
computer runs Gnome. I manually mount the flash drive in Sawfish, and I have
a FSTAB entry to allow this without Sudo. Gnome does an automatic mount. I
don't have superuser privilege on the work computer.

I am willing to use non-Ext3 filesystems, I just want RWX-RWX-RWX-style file
permissions.



Why so many difficult answers?
If you normally use ext3, use ext2(ext3 without journalizing) on your
flash drive.


Even Windows supports it.


--
.'`. Jens Van Broeckhoven
: :' : Debian GNU/Linux http://www.debian.org/
`. `' Free Software Foundation http://www.fsf.org/

`- Top-post-whole-quote-syndrome is evil!


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 03-11-2009, 11:08 AM
Sam Leon
 
Default Ext3 for flash drive

Mark Allums wrote:

Benjamin M. A'Lee wrote:

On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 08:23:43PM +0100, Jochen Schulz wrote:

Masatran / Deepak, R.:
Recently, I re-partitioned my flash drive. I made one FAT32
partition, and

one Ext3 partition.

Is ext3 on a flash medium really a good idea? At least cheap flash
drives probably don't have smart wear levelling.


And FAT32 is better?




Let's us all start a movement, an exFat on Linux movement. exFat is a
relatively new FS that is designed specifically for removable drives. It
is superficially an "extended FAT", while the underlying bits are new.
MS has added it to Vista with SP1, and to XP with a hotfix.


Everyone should hope someone competent takes the time to port it to
Linux, with full write capability. It is exactly what OP needs.


In the meantime, for removable drives 32G and under, one should probably
stick to FAT32/vfat.


Mark Allums


I disagree. Linux already has jffs2 for embedded flash applications.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JFFS2


However flash drives have their own controller:

Removable flash memory cards and USB flash drives have built-in
controllers to perform wear-levelling and error correction so use of a
specific flash file system does not add any benefit.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAND_flash#Flash_file_systems

Sam


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 03-11-2009, 11:37 AM
Mark Allums
 
Default Ext3 for flash drive

Sam Leon wrote:

Mark Allums wrote:

Benjamin M. A'Lee wrote:

On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 08:23:43PM +0100, Jochen Schulz wrote:

Masatran / Deepak, R.:
Recently, I re-partitioned my flash drive. I made one FAT32
partition, and

one Ext3 partition.

Is ext3 on a flash medium really a good idea? At least cheap flash
drives probably don't have smart wear levelling.


And FAT32 is better?




Let's us all start a movement, an exFat on Linux movement. exFat is
a relatively new FS that is designed specifically for removable
drives. It is superficially an "extended FAT", while the underlying
bits are new. MS has added it to Vista with SP1, and to XP with a
hotfix.


Everyone should hope someone competent takes the time to port it to
Linux, with full write capability. It is exactly what OP needs.


In the meantime, for removable drives 32G and under, one should
probably stick to FAT32/vfat.


Mark Allums


I disagree. Linux already has jffs2 for embedded flash applications.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JFFS2


However flash drives have their own controller:

Removable flash memory cards and USB flash drives have built-in
controllers to perform wear-levelling and error correction so use of a
specific flash file system does not add any benefit.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAND_flash#Flash_file_systems

Sam




I think you have missed my point. exFat has advantages that have
nothing to do with wear-leveling, etc. exFat is not a flash file
system, is is a file system, period. It addresses some of the problems
and limitation of FAT, and doesn't suffer as badly when removed without
unmounting. It is intended for *removable* storage, not necessarily flash.


MArk Allums





--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 03-11-2009, 04:42 PM
Stefan Monnier
 
Default Ext3 for flash drive

>> Recently, I re-partitioned my flash drive. I made one FAT32 partition, and
>> one Ext3 partition.
> Is ext3 on a flash medium really a good idea? At least cheap flash
> drives probably don't have smart wear levelling.

ext3 is not significantly different in this respect from most other FSes
(including FAT) to be a deciding factor, usually.


Stefan


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 03-11-2009, 09:09 PM
Tzafrir Cohen
 
Default Ext3 for flash drive

On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 12:19:09AM -0500, Mark Allums wrote:

> Let's us all start a movement, an exFat on Linux movement.

exFAT is written by a known patent troll who is already suing a Linux
company for a patent that may or may not be valid.

I'd stay away from exFAT.

http://lwn.net/Articles/321432/ (currently requires LWN subscription)
http://lwn.net/Articles/320737/

--
Tzafrir Cohen | tzafrir@jabber.org | VIM is
http://tzafrir.org.il | | a Mutt's
tzafrir@cohens.org.il | | best
ICQ# 16849754 | | friend


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 03-12-2009, 02:37 AM
Mark Allums
 
Default Ext3 for flash drive

Sam Leon wrote:

Mark Allums wrote:

Benjamin M. A'Lee wrote:

On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 08:23:43PM +0100, Jochen Schulz wrote:

Masatran / Deepak, R.:
Recently, I re-partitioned my flash drive. I made one FAT32
partition, and

one Ext3 partition.

Is ext3 on a flash medium really a good idea? At least cheap flash
drives probably don't have smart wear levelling.


And FAT32 is better?




Let's us all start a movement, an exFat on Linux movement. exFat is
a relatively new FS that is designed specifically for removable
drives. It is superficially an "extended FAT", while the underlying
bits are new. MS has added it to Vista with SP1, and to XP with a
hotfix.


Everyone should hope someone competent takes the time to port it to
Linux, with full write capability. It is exactly what OP needs.


In the meantime, for removable drives 32G and under, one should
probably stick to FAT32/vfat.


Mark Allums


I disagree. Linux already has jffs2 for embedded flash applications.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JFFS2


However flash drives have their own controller:

Removable flash memory cards and USB flash drives have built-in
controllers to perform wear-levelling and error correction so use of a
specific flash file system does not add any benefit.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAND_flash#Flash_file_systems

Sam



Sorry, I got threads confused, I did not mean to hijack. I was thinking
of something else.


I stick by my remarks, in context. ExFat is a very appropriate FS for
removable drives. Flash is not particularly relevant.


Mark Allums


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 03:27 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org