ntfs USB HDD permissions

[David Zeuthen]

On Sun, 2006-04-16 at 22:32 +0300, George Billios wrote:
> It seems that when you are busy the whole universe stops :)

Uh, I choose to take that as a compliment :-)

> For me the problem starts back in January if I remember correctly where
> you (FC developers) decided to use gnome-mount while knowing there are
> big problems. I will not raise a vs here whether pmount or gnome-mount
> is the way but I will raise the issue of using a not tested solution
> while you have a good one.

Well, I will concede that there are certain regressions when Fedora
moved from fstab-sync to gnome-mount, but in reality where you wrote
some fdi policy for fstab-sync for the former, you can (more easily)
just add entries /etc/fstab referencing symlinks in /dev/disk/by-uuid/
for the latter. Maybe that should have been in the release notes.

What's in FC5 works for most people right now (and it adds some nice
LUKS integration too) and we have a plan for solving all the
"interesting" corner cases in what I believe to be a sane way. It's just
a lot of work. But, hey, we take patches :-)

So I'm not sure choosing gnome-mount for FC5 was a bad decision after
all but you know how it is. It's in the eye of the beholder :-)

> I also learned in the process that reading devel lists 2 months before
> releasing a new FC version is a must!

Well, I can't speak for Red Hat or the Fedora Project, but my personal
take is that it's a community distribution with time-based releases and
that has pro and cons. Sometimes all the features you want just don't
make it into the release. Maybe the Fedora Project just needs to do a
better job at shaking out bugs or release noting things in the process,
but then again, I think this is true of any OS distributor.

    David