Greetings. A while ago someone, please forgive me I don't remeber exactly who, stated here that UDF is much better than FAT for flash-drives. So I try to use it this way. Unfortunately there seem to be a bug in kernel rendering UDF on portable media completrly useless. A filesystem for portable media should be "userless" because one most probably has different uids on different machines. The first problem is that I am unable to use uid=/gid= options if UDF volume's root directory (super-block???) has an owner of uid differnet than -1. In any other case the on-volume owner/group takes precedence over uid=/gid= options. The second bug lives somewhere in writing functions. If I set the root (sb???) owner to -1, the uid= and gid= work until I write a single file onto the volume. Next time I mount the volume, with uid=/gid= of course, everything on it is owned by root:root. No.3 If I create a volum with root directory (sb???) owned root:root, without hacking mkudffs, and I chown(1) some files, file ownership information also doesn't survive unmounting. From what I know UDF could really be a superb filesystem for flash memory devices but today it is unfortunately completly useless. I might even forget about the ownership information, as I said it's useless or even harmfull on portables but setting the "root" of the volum is crucial. Best regards. PS. Please remember to CC, I'am not a subscriber. -- Było mi bardzo miło. Trzecia pospolita klęska, [...] >Łukasz< Już nie katolicka lecz złodziejska. (c)PP
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
- Prev by Date: Re: Problems with CF bluetooth
- Next by Date: Re: I request inclusion of SAS Transport Layer and AIC-94xx into the kernel
- Previous by thread: reiser4 for 2.6.13 is available on our website
- Next by thread: [PATCH 0/7] CART - an advanced page replacement policy
- Index(es):
