Linked by Eugenia Loli on Fri 11th Nov 2005 00:53 UTC, submitted by Mr. Tan
Windows Sources at the company told Paul Thurrott this week that Microsoft will soon delay the release of Windows Vista Beta 2 from December 7, 2005 to sometime in January or February 2006. However, because the Vista development schedule is extremely time constrained, the company will try and make up lost time by eliminating one of the planned release candidate (RC) milestones that were planned for later in the process.
Thread beginning with comment 59246
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Broken design? Got proof?
by miro on Fri 11th Nov 2005 13:07 UTC
miro
Member since:
2005-07-13

Your lame arguments based on typos are not just unfriendly but also childish, please stop. The win32 api has been designed to deal with access and permissions in mind. All functions that provide access to an object have a lpSecurity parameter. In win95 this was always set to NULL which translates to default user access in NT4 and above (been a while might be a bit different). This is called FORWARD COMPATIBILITY, repeat 3x. Also the FAT never supported ownership and it DOES NOT on linux and nowhere else, NTFS does. I'm not a ms fanboy and I never was. Please next time give details if you want to argue and stop playing with words.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Broken design? Got proof?
by hal2k1 on Fri 11th Nov 2005 13:18 in reply to "RE: Broken design? Got proof?"
hal2k1 Member since:
2005-11-11

"Your lame arguments based on typos are not just unfriendly but also childish, please stop. The win32 api has been designed to deal with access and permissions in mind. All functions that provide access to an object have a lpSecurity parameter. In win95 this was always set to NULL which translates to default user access in NT4 and above (been a while might be a bit different). This is called FORWARD COMPATIBILITY, repeat 3x. Also the FAT never supported ownership and it DOES NOT on linux and nowhere else, NTFS does. I'm not a ms fanboy and I never was. Please next time give details if you want to argue and stop playing with words."

Oh ye of little understanding, here is an experiment for you to perform:

On your "multi-user" (snicker) OS - NT or any above it matters not - copy a file with a .exe extension (Notepad.exe will do just fine) on to another volume which is formatted fat32 or fat16 - a USB stick or even a floppy disk will do.

OK, now right click on the copy of the file (say on the USB stick) - and tell me who owns the file. Do any of the "users" of your so-claimed "multi-user OS" own that file? Has the fat32 filesystem lost track of who owns it? Perchance?

OK, now double-click the file.

Does it still execute? Hmmmm. How did the OS decide if it should execute, if the file does not have an owner or have execute permissions set?

Multi-user OS? Pffft.

PS: Just to make it perfectly clear - Linux also cannot set owner or execute permission attributes of a file on a fat32 volume - as you say that filesystem doesn't support that. But then again, no way in hell will Linux execute a file without execute permissions - so one can't run a file from a fat32 volume.

Comprendez?

Edited 2005-11-11 13:27

Reply Parent Score: 1

miro Member since:
2005-07-13

Well it all depends on how your mounts points are setup. It is nice that you can select a user who will own files on a FAT partition. I really see this only as a minor problem, there are problems on the other side too: if you had a usb stick with ext3 fs
on which a setuid application had all correct bits set a bad mount point (missing noexec) could really screw things up! So in the end be carefull not to launch anything from a medium you can't trust, no matter what OS you are using.

Reply Parent Score: 1

rcsteiner Member since:
2005-07-12

Well, owner and execute permission attributes *could* be managed on a FAT32 volume, but Linux would have to use a technique similar to that used by OS/2 to store EA's on FAT16 volumes -- create one or more dedicated hidden files on each FAT32 partition in which to store the additional info on a file by file basis.

Reply Parent Score: 1

raver31 Member since:
2005-07-06

you can set ownership and execution rights to files in fat32 volumes if you mount the partion using extended attributes.
now, the only reason I can think of for anyone to do this, would be to share a partion with windows on a dual boot setup, and run applications in a sandbox. other than that, why use fat32 ?

Reply Parent Score: 2