Bash scripts

[Kevin Gordon]

Sascha:


Continued to play with this.  Went into nautilus on an ext2 formatted
card, and there is a checkbox in the panel for allowing execution of
files.  The owner and other permission boxes didn't seem to do
anything; but, clicking that on *did* work. Also, you were correct
about it needing to not be FAT, checking that box, even though it sill
displays, didn't 'stick' for FAT. Thanks.

Cheers,


KG

On Monday, April 18,
2011, Kevin Gordon <kgordon420 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Sascha:
>
> The file system actually had no bearing on the issue I was having, whether ext2,
> ext3, or FAT32, the symptoms were identical - recent versions of udisks now does not allow
> 'direct' execution of scripts from auto-mounted removable media.
>
> Also,
> there is some debate as to whether putting a journalling fs onto an SD
> or USB drive is wise, as it might half its life by in essence doubling the number of writes.  In
> general,  I tend to stick with the factory default unless I need
> multiple partitions, symbolic link, or specific linux-swap support, since I presume the
> manufacturer has formatted it with the right number of blocks, units,
> etc to best match their controller/memory config.  If I need those, I will still use ext2.  Call me optimistic :-)
>
> Cheers,
>
> KG
>
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 4:13 AM, Sascha Silbe <sascha-ml-reply-to-2011-2 at silbe.org> wrote:
>
> Excerpts from Kevin Gordon's message of Mon Apr 18 00:36:26 +0200 2011:
>
>> But, since my main use of this technique is to
>> semi-automate the process of installing a slew of custom activities and
>> rpm's upon initial build and deployment, having to manually change every
>> machine manually to basically avoid 5 keystrokes, was sort of
>> counter-productive  :-)
>
> If you're only using this USB stick with Linux machines, why don't you
> just format it using a file system with POSIX semantics, i.e. ext3?
>
> Sascha
>
> --
> http://sascha.silbe.org/
> http://www.infra-silbe.de/
>
>