Samba server problem

[Christopher Chan]

> Uhhh, ok I just learned something.  I had thought that you were 
> *supposed* to set permissions on "data" that are not intended to be 
> executable to "rw" and not "x".  Though now that I look for it, I can't 
> find a reference for why I "Knew" that.  But setting permissions fixed 
> it.  A couple of questions if you don't mind.
>
> Would it be better practice to have the directory "owned" by the group 
> "users" (if you can even to that) and set the permissions to 700, or to 
> do as it is now, files are "owned" by me, but permissions are 770?
>
> So following chmod -R 770 /raid/Windata everything is set to:
>
> drwxrw-r--  9 patton users 4096 2009-09-19 22:11 Windata
>
> More generically, why all the permission levels if you can't touch the 
> files w/o the correct "rwx" permissions?  or am I missing something 
> critical?  I suppose this question really should be added to my reading 
> list for future reference.
>
>   

It is already 'owned' by users. The first set of permissions related to 
the user owner, the second set to the group owner and the last set to 
everybody else.


For directories, the 'x' bit represents the permission to search (go 
into - not list contents of) the directory while it represents the 
permission to execute for files.


If you setup a directory with 3 or '-wx' permissions, you can put files 
in that directory but not list the contents.