mufs-users Mailing List for Multiuser Filesystem
Brought to you by:
wez
You can subscribe to this list here.
2000 |
Jan
|
Feb
(2) |
Mar
(2) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
(4) |
Aug
|
Sep
(9) |
Oct
(2) |
Nov
(5) |
Dec
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2001 |
Jan
(8) |
Feb
(10) |
Mar
(3) |
Apr
(1) |
May
(3) |
Jun
(3) |
Jul
|
Aug
(9) |
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
2002 |
Jan
(1) |
Feb
|
Mar
(1) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
2004 |
Jan
(1) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
2008 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
(2) |
2011 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
(1) |
Sep
(3) |
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
2014 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
(1) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
From: <l.b...@li...> - 2004-01-20 16:56:43
|
Hi there, has anybody been successfully using muFS under Amithlon? Despite have followed exactly the instructions on the manual, have not been able to test run it on my System. The problem I am encountering is the following: 1) If I define the System: disk as a muFS partition, after HDToolbox reboots the disk in no longer being recognized (the contents is not lost, though, because as soon as I redefine it as the original PFS3 partition, everything is back in place). The disk is simply reported as a NOT A DOS DISK in device etc. So, considering that System: is my primary AmigaOS boot disk, I'm not able to boot into any Amiga environment and therefore test run muFS. Have therefore booted from Amithlon CD into a basic Amiga environment. Subsequently, if I attempt to format the System: partition with muFS on it, to re-install afterwards everything from scratch on a newly formatted muFS partition (from a spare disk), the system refuses to do it as the System: disk is write-protected. Have also attempted to use muformat (also on Aminet) but it just won't work under the basic Amithlon CD boot environment (not to mention, eventually, any further considerations regarding access rights on the disk itself). 2) If, instead, I leave System: as a PFS3 partition and having muFS fully installed and configured but on a PFS3 partition, including the appropriate keyfiles for each partition I want protected by muFS, at the boot I have muFS complaining with an alert saying that I do not have any partition with muFS on it (which is not true because, in at least one case, I had another partition (Data:) defineed as a muFS partition as well. Then I have the requester prompting me to enter my ID (root) and then nothing happens, I'm left with a blank Workbench screen in front of me. I have installed muFS v.1.7 (from Aminet), added the fix to patch the OS3.5 original FFS fastfilesystem, the fixed Multiuser.library etc. Also, on some occasions, I found that if I select muFS as the primary filesystem on my System: disk I sometimes get the NODOS DISK problem highlighted above, sometimes I get instead a very nice GURU and the disk just wouldn't boot, particularly when I also attempt to use muPFS3 as primary filesystem for my System: disk, in place of muFS. According to PFS3 manual, the multiuser version of PFS3 does require muFS installed, though is not really being used as the filesystem for the disk if I select muPFS3 instead. So, it looks like sorting this problem out is getting kinda of a pain in the neck... I wonder if anyone has ever experienced something like that in installing (and getting to run) muFS under Amithlon... Regards. |
From: Wez F. <we...@th...> - 2002-03-26 12:46:46
|
Hi, I don't know if you ever got a reply to this; in theory it is possible to make massign-ed devices show up in req-tools, but you would need to handle a bunch of messages (rather than just proxy them onto the real device) and link into one of the DOS lists. I'm not fully up on the details right now. There is code in the mufs2 repository that could be adapted for this purpose. Sorry that I can't be much help right now - I'm very busy :-( --Wez. -----Original Message----- From: muf...@li... [mailto:muf...@li...] On Behalf Of muf...@li... Sent: 19 January 2002 20:10 To: muf...@li... Subject: Mufs-users digest, Vol 1 #49 - 1 msg Send Mufs-users mailing list submissions to muf...@li... To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mufs-users or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to muf...@li... You can reach the person managing the list at muf...@li... When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Mufs-users digest..." Today's Topics: 1. MAssign (Ciro Scognamiglio) --__--__-- Message: 1 From: Ciro Scognamiglio <mo...@in...> To: muf...@li... Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 16:31:39 +0100 Subject: [Mufs-users] MAssign Hullo, Hoping that someone is still listening on this list... This is something I have wondered about for some time. Is it possible to create a "pseudo" device with massign? I mean: I use massign to create the Home: assignment, but it doesn't show up in reqtools or even in the device lister of opus, and I think it would be nice to have that thing work. (I read that somewhere in the mufs docs but I was wondering if there was a way to get around it) Also, I have noticed that with OS3.5+ the icon that appears on the desktop has the name of the device the directory is in and not the name of the assign I created. (i.e. it shows "system" instead of "home", and system is the partition where the home dir is in). Kind regards Ciro. -- There was a time when a fool and his money were soon parted, but now it happens to everybody. -- Adlai Stevenson --__--__-- _______________________________________________ Mufs-users mailing list Muf...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mufs-users End of Mufs-users Digest |
From: Ciro S. <mo...@in...> - 2002-01-19 15:58:26
|
Hullo, Hoping that someone is still listening on this list... This is something I have wondered about for some time. Is it possible to create a "pseudo" device with massign? I mean: I use massign to create the Home: assignment, but it doesn't show up in reqtools or even in the device lister of opus, and I think it would be nice to have that thing work. (I read that somewhere in the mufs docs but I was wondering if there was a way to get around it) Also, I have noticed that with OS3.5+ the icon that appears on the desktop has the name of the device the directory is in and not the name of the assign I created. (i.e. it shows "system" instead of "home", and system is the partition where the home dir is in). Kind regards Ciro. -- There was a time when a fool and his money were soon parted, but now it happens to everybody. -- Adlai Stevenson |
From: Ciro S. <mo...@in...> - 2001-08-24 17:34:19
|
Hullo, Would it be nice to have NIS client support with MuFS? I had a (really fast) look at some yp (being NIS) docs and tools...multiuser.library could authenticate users using nis... Kind regards Ciro. -- What we anticipate seldom occurs; what we least expected generally happens. -- Benjamin Disraeli |
From: Andreas M. <sp...@gm...> - 2001-08-22 22:21:18
|
mufs-users-request wrote in a Mail about "Mufs-users digest, Vol 1 #46 - 2 msgs": > This is normal behaviour, you have to be logged in as root for the > ACTION_FORMAT packet to be accepted (at least under muFFS). Okay, I will test this. > protection for someone decided to crack a system (I had to do it myself > on numerous occasions after being locked out by inconsistent keyfiles). Uhuh, I am gonna keep a small boot partition without MufS. Both of my floppies died. So I could expect serious troubles. > Don't know, I still use as225r2 ;-) Uh :-) >> Basically I would chown all commands to root.root but all programs that >> can >> be used by a normal user to owner:root and rwx r-x r-x ? >> Basically, that is ;-) > That's the way to go. K, thx. Good bye, -- Andreas <sp...@gm...> Lots of them talking, few of them know, soul of a woman was created below...! -- Led Zeppelin |
From: <vo...@me...> - 2001-08-22 10:27:48
|
Hi, >When I try to format (both quick and normal mode) the MuPFS3 partitions I >get an error-requester: Disk is writeprotected. I use OS3.9, the drive is >20gig IDE, the partition-names in question are named at the moment like >HD1.1 (since I have a HD1: and I want to change HD1.1 to HD1 once I got >rid of the old HD1) but this should not be the problem, I did this already >when converting my FFS diskss to SFS disks. This is normal behaviour, you have to be logged in as root for the ACTION_FORMAT packet to be accepted (at least under muFFS). >I have to boot without multiuser.library enabled, because I get the yellow >alert of missing Keyfiles (since there is no mufs partition yet). >Uh, maybe I have to have MuFs to be active already when trying to format >a MuPFS3 partition ? >This is impossible ! i have only SFS and FFS (classic) partitions ! You first have to create those damn keyfiles under the single user version of the filesystem, then change to the multiuser version with HDToolBox, else you will have no end of trouble. I always thought these keyfiles were a bad idea: they only help to shoot yourself in the foot and are no real protection for someone decided to crack a system (I had to do it myself on numerous occasions after being locked out by inconsistent keyfiles). >If I use the usergroup.library replacement from Aminet, does the 'login' >command for MuFS also log me in in AmiTCP ? Don't know, I still use as225r2 ;-) >And: Are there any differences in the praxis to Unix/Linux ? Well, I can't say for muPFS, but muFFS basically pays no attention to directory protection bits, unless you remove all access to a category of users, making the directory unaccessible. The most annoying "feature" is that write protection on directories only prevents exclusive locking, but not modifications of the directory content like on Unix. In particular, anyone can create files in any directory he can access, in particular the root directory which has no protection bits. I plan to do something about this in a later version of the patch, but I will first wait for the final FFS release (probably in OS3.9 BB2) as it is quite some work. >Basically I would chown all commands to root.root but all programs that can >be used by a normal user to owner:root and rwx r-x r-x ? >Basically, that is ;-) That's the way to go. Best wishes, -- Etienne Vogt. |
From: Andreas M. <sp...@gm...> - 2001-08-21 19:31:12
|
Hi, =20 I still have a problem: =20 All those partitions with MuPfS3 on it show up as DOSTYPE:BAD (I did no= t format them, yet) On the same disk, all SFS partitions showed up a= s DOSTYPE:NODOS before I formatted them. =20 When I try to format (both quick and normal mode) the MuPFS3 partitions = I get an error-requester: Disk is writeprotected. I use OS3.9, the drive i= s 20gig IDE, the partition-names in question are named at the moment lik= e HD1.1 (since I have a HD1: and I want to change HD1.1 to HD1 once I go= t rid of the old HD1) but this should not be the problem, I did this alread= y when converting my FFS diskss to SFS disks. =20 I have to boot without multiuser.library enabled, because I get the yello= w alert of missing Keyfiles (since there is no mufs partition yet). =20 Uh, maybe I have to have MuFs to be active already when trying to format = a MuPFS3 partition ? This is impossible ! i have only SFS and FFS (classic) partitions ! =20 Last but not least: =20 I use AmiTCP-GENESiS It is mostly compatible with the old AmiTCP releases= =2E =20 If I use the usergroup.library replacement from Aminet, does the 'login' command for MuFS also log me in in AmiTCP ? =20 And: Are there any differences in the praxis to Unix/Linux ? Basically I would chown all commands to root.root but all programs that c= an be used by a normal user to owner:root and rwx r-x r-x ? Basically, that is = ;-) Good bye, --=20 Andreas=20 <sp...@gm...> Cool links #0005: Nupedia the open content encyclopedia http://www.nupedia.org |
From: Andreas M. <sp...@gm...> - 2001-08-20 16:21:17
|
Ciro wrote in a Mail about "Mufs-users digest, Vol 1 #44 - 1 msg": > Go to my home page: http://www.silab.dsi.unimi.it/~cs556770 Thank you very much for your answer ! > I made several changes to AmigaOS and now I have an "almost" solid > system > with "almost" full multiuser system working (just like an Unix > OS)...every > user has its own prefs, home etc...but I had to work hard to reach a > good > configuration...and still there are some big bugs, expecially with > security. Yeah, I guess it will be hard work to set up the muFS. Happily I am the only user, but I want to make the system safe, especially since it is going to be part of my LAN, and that LAN will soon be on a cable-modem. Good bye, -- Andreas <sp...@gm...> Cool links #0014: |
From: Ciro S. <mo...@in...> - 2001-08-19 12:10:52
|
Salve Andreas Il 17-Ago-01, hai detto: > AmigaOS 45.2 (OS3.9,BB1) > multiuser.library 39.165 > usergroup.library 4.5 > AmiTCP-GENESiS 68020 4.6 > DirectoryOpus 5.82 > > I am going to drop use of FFS completely and have all partitions formatted > with multi-user version of PFS3, three partitions will remain SFS. To use mufs + DirOpus + PFS2 you should use a patched mufs.library and make some changes to the startup sequence. To use Magellan with multiuser filesystem you need the 39.166 version of the multiuser.library, that unfortunately cannot be patched with the install program of PFS2 (it only patches the previos version of the mufs library). I recompiled a multiuser.library that works ok with PFS, AFS and diropus (with some advice from one of the PFS team he gave me some time ago), and you need to use the "OWNTASK" option of the login command... Go to my home page: http://www.silab.dsi.unimi.it/~cs556770 and download that library, follow the instructions in the readme file on how to set up Dopus and everything should work fine :) > > So, here is my couple of quesations: > > · What can I do about the filesys-type (ID), so PFSformat formats my > partitions ? Could the error have another reason ? the FS id of the muPFS is different from the one explained in the mufs manual. again, have a look at the readme of my patched mufs.library...or have a deeper look at the PFS2 docs, I know it is there somewhere ;) > · I heard about a special usergroup.library that is compatible with > AmiTCP's one ? That was years ago. Since I use GENESiS I am not sure > what to do. You should use that library as Genesis uses almost the same version of that lib of AmiTCP...you can find it on aminet. > P.S. I am preparing my Amiga for the next ten years ;-D, so I want to make > all as solid as possible. I made several changes to AmigaOS and now I have an "almost" solid system with "almost" full multiuser system working (just like an Unix OS)...every user has its own prefs, home etc...but I had to work hard to reach a good configuration...and still there are some big bugs, expecially with security. Saluti, Ciro. -- My mother's menu consisted of two choices: Take it or leave it. -- Buddy Hackett |
From: Andreas M. <sp...@gm...> - 2001-08-17 16:11:24
|
Hello, Please forgive my detailed description. I want to gain as much info as possible before I proceed so I won't experience any surprises (knock on wood...) The time has finally come... I will use MuFS :-) !=20 =20 I used FFS and SFS upto now. I just installed a new Fujitsu 20GB drive on internal IDE. I also have a 850MB IDE drive and a 4.3GB SCSI drive. The _complete_ system will b= e restructured. I use: AmigaOS 45.2 (OS3.9,BB1) multiuser.library 39.165 usergroup.library 4.5 AmiTCP-GENESiS=A068020 4.6 DirectoryOpus 5.82 I am going to drop use of FFS completely and have all partitions formatted with multi-user version of PFS3, three partitions will remain SFS. Drive #1, Quantum TRB, IDE, 850 MB, 2 partitions partition-name partition-size filesys comment SYS: 425 MB muPFS3 SYS0: 425 MB SFS this will be a mirror of SYS: Drive #2, IBM DCAS, SCSI, 4.3 GB, 7 partitions partition-name partition-size filesys comment SYS1: 50 MB SFS a basic boot partition, just in case the main drive fucks up /boot 15 MB Linux this will be the /boot for Debian m68k / 400 MB Linux linux-root /home 450 MB FAT32 linux-home /swap 128 MB SWAP linux-SWAP MAC0: 2000 GB MACFS Shapeshifter, MAC native MSD0: 350 MB FAT16 IBM emu, MS-DOS native Drive #3, Fujitsu, IDE, 20.0 GB, 9 partitions partition-name partition-size filesys comment /boot 15 MB Linux another linux boot, in case the SCSI drive fucks up WORK: 3900 MB MuPFS3 includes all my Amiga apps and ADE. I would like to make it 4500 MB but I want to go sure. I believe below 4 GB I will have npo problems backing up my data to a streamer and my streamer does 4GB uncompressed (DDS2) per tape. DATA0: 2000 MB SFS will contain ISO files and temporary storage like VMEM: DATA1: 2000 MB muPFS3 This will be an XFH partition. I am not sure if XFH works with other filesystems than FFS. (XFH is the overlaying filesys to transparently pack data using XPK on the fly) DATA2: 2000 MB muPFS3 MB0: 450 MB SFS UMS message base GAME: 3000 MB SFS some games /usr 1200 MB Linux /var 500 MB Linux the rest of this partition is free at the moment. I configured the 20Gig drive. Where I added the muPF string (hex) into filesystem-type I got this string: muP\46 Seems everything after the third char stays hex. According to the manual it should be muPF. All these partitions show up as DHx:BAD PFSformat will not format these partitions. Error is: "Full format not possible" I do not think that PFSformat worries about the DEVICE name being HD1.1 ?! All others are okay, (SFS is NDOS, since unformatted) and the Linux ones ar= e hidden anyway. So, here is my couple of quesations: =B7 What can I do about the filesys-type (ID), so PFSformat formats my partitions ? Could the error have another reason ? =B7 Is someone here aware of how UMS uses the multiuser.library ? Do I have to make my messagebase-upartition muFS or will the system just be used fo= r user-validation (login, password) =B7 Is it safe to use XFH with a non FFS filesystem ? Does it have a partition-size-limit ? =B7 I heard there must be a special library or fsys version be used when doing Dopus5+PFS3+muFS....Where can I get it ? The question once got asked on the MuFS list but it seems I missed the answer. =B7 I heard about a special usergroup.library that is compatible with AmiTCP's one ? That was years ago. Since I use GENESiS I am not sure what to do. P.S. I am preparing my Amiga for the next ten years ;-D, so I want to make all as solid as possible. Good bye, Good bye, --=20 Andreas=20 <sp...@gm...> Cool links #0011: Home of the FAQs http://www.faqs.org/ |
From: <vo...@me...> - 2001-08-09 14:18:44
|
>I was going to make a backup using tar so to preserve file attributes >(permissions and ownership)...I use mufs. >While I create the archive everything works correctly, but if I try to >extract it owner informations are not extracted: every file extracted will >have the ownership of the user actually extracting the archive. That's normal behaviour as far as muFS is concerned. To revert to the original user, the tar command should do a chown() via ixemul.library with in turn should reroute this to a SetOwner() call. First, make sure you do the restore when logged as the superuser, else muFS won't allow you to change the file ownership. If it still doesn't work, then something is broken elsewhere. May be tar not doing the chown() call or ixemul not propagating it properly. Best regards, -- Etienne Vogt. |
From: Ciro S. <mo...@in...> - 2001-08-02 16:42:51
|
Hullo, I was going to make a backup using tar so to preserve file attributes (permissions and ownership)...I use mufs. While I create the archive everything works correctly, but if I try to extract it owner informations are not extracted: every file extracted will have the ownership of the user actually extracting the archive. File ownership is saved inside the archive itself, I am sure as with a "tar ztvf archivename" I can see the correct owners...also, If I try to extract the archive on a linux box owner infos are extracted correctly... is the tar command broken or what? Kind regards Ciro. -- Learning without thought is labour lost. -- Confucius |
From: Ciro S. <mo...@in...> - 2001-06-14 18:59:25
|
Salve Wez Il 14-Giu-01, hai detto: > Interested, but extremely short on time. > > If anyone out there has some time for muFS and wants to see SFS with muFS > please let me know and I can help get things moving. > > Ciro, could you let me know how to contact these people? (Is that THE > Ralph Schmidt? - the name sounds familiar) I don't know...I got this address: http://home.wtal.de/js/ from the realdreams.cz news site and contacted the author of the latest rel. AFAICR SFS was a dead project as it hasn't been updated for ages...I got quite surprised to see this update...uh and it is for morphos too... Saluti, Ciro. -- The trouble with some women is that they get all excited about nothing -- and then marry him. -- Cher |
From: Wez F. <we...@th...> - 2001-06-14 10:09:40
|
> I wrote an email to the latest SFS version author asking for mufs support, > here is his answer. I hope someone is interested. >> Maybe they can do it themself? The SFS source is availibe through CVS >> too. They should contact Ralph Schmidt and/or David Gerber to get CVS >> access to the SFS source. Interested, but extremely short on time. If anyone out there has some time for muFS and wants to see SFS with muFS please let me know and I can help get things moving. Ciro, could you let me know how to contact these people? (Is that THE Ralph Schmidt? - the name sounds familiar) Thanks! --Wez. |
From: Ciro S. <mo...@in...> - 2001-06-13 12:25:18
|
Hullo, I wrote an email to the latest SFS version author asking for mufs support, here is his answer. I hope someone is interested. *** Begin of forwarded message *** Hello _moray. You wrote: > I have just downloaded the latest version of SFS, I was wondering > if it will support the Multiuser library in the future (I currently > use a MuFS environment at home with afs and ffs). Maybe later, not in the next versions. I currently don't have much time for SFS and fixing bugs has a higher priotity as adding new features. > You will find some infos on mufs on mufs.sourceforge.net. > I bet current mufs developers wold be happy to help you adding > support for the multiuser environment to SFS. Maybe they can do it themself? The SFS source is availibe through CVS too. They should contact Ralph Schmidt and/or David Gerber to get CVS access to the SFS source. *** End of forwarded message *** Kind regards Ciro. -- An expert is a person who has made all the mistakes which can be made in a very narrow field. -- Graffiti |
From: Oliver R. <ol...@fu...> - 2001-05-19 14:56:09
|
Hi Andreas, On 17-Apr-01 02:10:36 BST, Andreas Mixich wrote: >> Where do i get the multiuser.library whic has been patched to work with >> PFS and Dopus at the same time ? > Did you find it meanwhile ? Does the PFS3 version not work with Dopus5 > Magellan even if the MuFS switch is set in Dopus5 prefs ? > > Did you ask on the Dopus5 mailing-list ? > > If such a special MuFS is needed, could you post the URL to it ? FYI, I'm using the standard muFS version of PFS3 together with DOpus and it works just fine. -- *Oliver Roberts* - software developer & web designer http://www.oliver-roberts.co.uk/ - ICQ: 34640231 /ol...@fu.../ | /oli...@in.../ -- PlayStation Amiga mailing list ==> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/psxamiga/ <tsb> |
From: Andreas M. <sp...@gm...> - 2001-05-19 13:11:27
|
mufs-users-request wrote in a Mail about "Mufs-users digest, Vol 1 #36 - 1 msg": > Message: 1 From:> Robert Purser <rob...@re...> To:> muf...@li... Date:> Mon, 02 Apr 2001 01:24:00 +0000 > Subject: [Mufs-users] PFS + Dopus version of multiuser.library > Hello muf...@li... > Where do i get the multiuser.library whic has been patched to work with > PFS > and Dopus at the same time ? Did you find it meanwhile ? Does the PFS3 version not work with Dopus5 Magellan even if the MuFS switch is set in Dopus5 prefs ? Did you ask on the Dopus5 mailing-list ? If such a special MuFS is needed, could you post the URL to it ? Thx. Good bye, -- Andreas <sp...@gm...> An example of hard water is ice. |
From: Ciro S. <mo...@in...> - 2001-05-17 10:48:54
|
Hullo, I have an almost full functioning version of leafnode (a small news server) ported to amigaos + ixemul... I still have to solve a problem that may be caused by my mufs environment. I have 2 questions for you all: 1- If anyone NOT using mufs would please try my port, It would only require to install the server and use it for a week or two following my instructions... 2- because of file permissions it would be better letting leafnode and all its tools to work with GID and UID "news", of course I could add the "s" bit, but this don't always work, also because leafnode itself is launched by inetd, and amitcp inetd (but miami too) doesn't care much about mufs... I was looking for a method to easly change the running process UID in a compatibile way to mufs...in c of course :) As I am now working on an examination progect (small dns server aaargh! :P) I don't have much time, but in the next days I will look into it, in the meantime any suggestion is much appreciated. thnx. Kind regards Ciro. -- He who kisses and tells is begging for competition. -- Unknown |
From: Robert P. <rob...@re...> - 2001-04-02 00:34:07
|
Hello muf...@li... Where do i get the multiuser.library whic has been patched to work with PFS and Dopus at the same time ? Regards, Robert Purser - rob...@re... |
From: Ciro S. <mo...@in...> - 2001-03-21 19:57:13
|
Sorry Wez, I senti this one privatly while it was meant to go there :P Salve Wez Il 20-Mar-01, hai detto: > The SetDefProtect support utility (part of multiuser 1.8) will allow you > to set the AmigaOS equivalent of the unix umask. aargh! didn't notice it :P thnx BTW, now that I am here, I am now using Genesis from OS3.9 instead of amitcp. With amitcp I run it at startup time logging the user with this: amitcp:bin/login -f $USER this would allow me to not have to login twice (first time mufs 2nd amitcp). With genesis everything changes and I cannot use this method anymore...anyone have some suggestions? Ciro. -- |
From: Wez F. <we...@th...> - 2001-03-20 00:46:59
|
> From: Ciro Scognamiglio <mo...@in...> > Subject: [Mufs-users] umask? > I was just wandering if there was something like this for mufs. > I tried to set the env var UMASK 077. > Under Unix this one will let the current user have automatically 700 > permissions to the files he creates or modify. > > with mufs and AmigaOS every file created by a user will get 755 > permissions...anyone knows how to change this? The SetDefProtect support utility (part of multiuser 1.8) will allow you to set the AmigaOS equivalent of the unix umask. --Wez. |
From: Ciro S. <mo...@in...> - 2001-03-19 08:08:14
|
Hullo, I was just wandering if there was something like this for mufs. I tried to set the env var UMASK 077. Under Unix this one will let the current user have automatically 700 permissions to the files he creates or modify. with mufs and AmigaOS every file created by a user will get 755 permissions...anyone knows how to change this? Kind regards Ciro. -- The best way to publicize a governmental or political action is to attempt to hide it. -- Mark B Cohen |
From: Andreas M. <sp...@gm...> - 2001-02-25 02:30:00
|
mufs-users-request wrote in a Mail about "Mufs-users digest, Vol 1 #31 - 1 msg": > It now support 3 new FileSystem types (PFS3, AFS and I have added a new > FFS Uh, I made a mistake. Not SFS, but new FFS ! Too bad :-( Any chance to see an SFS version ? Thx. Good bye, -- Andreas <sp...@gm...> Guru Meditation #8100000B.48454C50 |
From: Andreas M. <sp...@gm...> - 2001-02-25 02:09:59
|
mufs-users-request wrote in a Mail about "Mufs-users digest, Vol 1 #31 - 1 msg": > It now support 3 new FileSystem types (PFS3, AFS and I have added a new > FFS > entry for the latest patch of Etienne). Great ! For SFS ?! Yipeee ! How do I install it on SFS ? > how to > convert smakefile to a gnu Makefile? (maybe using autoconfig can >=20 Hmmm......it would be more complicated the other way, I think. One important thing to consider is, that a GNU Makefile handles the Shell d= ifferently than the Amiga native smakefile ! For example: Escape characters are different. Command execution might lead = to unexpected results. You might want to execute the GNU Makefile on a 'sh'= or similare, UNIX ported Shell. But most of it should be very similare. All you need to do is to=20 look at scutil.guide under smake and read the GNU Make Man or Guide (ADE ha= s a guided version). Then, if I remember right, there is a special GNU Make= version on Aminet, that claims be GNU Make but Amiga native. I don't know = too much about it.=20 Good bye, --=20 Andreas=20 <sp...@gm...> Better living a beggar than buried an emperor. |
From: Wez F. <we...@th...> - 2001-02-25 00:12:13
|
> At http://www.silab.dsi.unimi.it/~cs556770 in the=0D =0D I will put a link to it from the mufs page.=0D =0D > I would like to recompile the library (and=0D > hopefully some other tools) with=0D > the gcc instead of Sas/c, does anyone know=0D > where to find some docs on how to=0D > convert smakefile to a gnu Makefile? (maybe using=0D > autoconfig can be useful :P)=0D =0D You can pretty much use the smakefile as it, but you will need to change = the rules so it uses gcc options.=0D =0D However, I would advise you not to bother; you will need to change a lot = of the code in the library in order for it to compile.=0D =0D The support tools rely too much on SAS specifics, and will require LOADS = of work to get them to compile on the supported compilers. By supported = compilers, I mean DCC/DICE and GCC. I use DICE (which I have ported to L= inux), and I believe that Rich uses GCC.=0D =0D It would be better if you spent your time on getting the support tools fo= r mufs2 in order; if you are interested, let me know - we are aiming for = a beta in the not too distant future.=0D =0D --Wez. |