| 1 |
Kevin O'Gorman wrote: |
| 2 |
> I am annoyed with using vfat on my USB flash drives because I cannot |
| 3 |
> get proper permissions and ownership. Not for the security (meaningless |
| 4 |
> on a drive that easy to steal, unless encrypted), but annoying anyway. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> Is there any technical reason I should not repartition it as something else |
| 7 |
> -- ext3 or xfs, say -- and allow executables and such? |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> ++ kevin |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Most people format their flash drives as vfat for interoperability, |
| 13 |
since all the major operating systems can read from and write to vfat |
| 14 |
filesystems. If you know you'll only be plugging it into Linux systems, |
| 15 |
then go right ahead. As far as ownership goes, remember that [ug]ids |
| 16 |
are stored numerically on the device, so a file that's owned by your |
| 17 |
user on your system may well be owned by (random example) apache on |
| 18 |
someone else's. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
I seem to remember reading somewhere that one shouldn't use a |
| 21 |
journalling file system on flash-based devices such as USB drives (i.e. |
| 22 |
you should use ext2 rather than ext3), but I can't find the reference |
| 23 |
right now. Can anyone clarify this for me? |
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives