Rsync and FAT32

[Larry Hall (Cygwin)]

On 3/9/2011 3:12 PM, Panos Katergiathis wrote:
> Thank you for your polite reply. The issue at hand is of a more generic
> nature and (if Google is any witness) is rather old. I am referring to the
> well known problem of cygwin (at least, when rsync is used) not properly
> handling NTFS permissions, thus resulting in folders and files that are no
> longer deletable, therefore updatable, therefore usable. I thought that, by
> using a FAT32 partition, perhaps permissions would no longer be a problem. Is
> this a valid thought?

If it were, then using the 'noacl' mount option would do the same thing
for you.  But it sounds to me (and I still have to WAG on this because I
don't know any specifics of the problem you're seeing) like if either of
above would be a valid solution for you that you should be able to get
the same or better results from using the flags that rsync provides.  But
like I said, that's just a WAG based on available information.

-- 
Larry

_____________________________________________________________________

A: Yes.
> Q: Are you sure?
>> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
>>> Q: Why is top posting annoying in email?

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple