Re: sshfs has fubared mount
On Tuesday 09 February 2021 10:52:02 Anssi Saari wrote:
> Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> writes:
> > fusermount: user has no write access to mountpoint /sshnet/Hardinge1
> > which is
> > ls -la /sshnet/ (on this machine)
> > total 84
> > drwxr-xr-x 9 gene gene 4096 Feb 8 10:10 .
> > drwxr-xr-x 28 root root 4096 Dec 12 03:44 ..
> > drwxr-xr-x 1 root root 4096 Feb 4 15:59 GO704
> > drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Feb 8 10:10 Hardinge1
> > drwxr-xr-x 1 root root 4096 Feb 3 14:16 lathe
> > drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Apr 25 2019 redpitaya
> > drwxr-xr-x 1 root root 4096 Feb 1 04:46 rpi4
> > drwxr-xr-x 1 root root 4096 Feb 4 15:43 sixty40
> > drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 May 2 2019 vna
>
> With a little testing mounting with sshfs needs write access to the
> mount point so it's not possible to mount to your /sshnet/Hardinge1
> since you don't have write permission, only root does. So you need to
> add write permissions to your mount point /sshnet/Hardinge1.
>
> Now, if you're saying you can mount to sixty40, lathe, GO704, rpi4
> without write permissions then I'm baffled. You seem to indicate the
> listing shows that those directories are currently mounted in which
> case the mount point permissions are not shown?
See my reply to David. All those mounts are to the root of the
filesystems on the other machines, and that then accounted for the fact
I was seeing root:root for the already mounted systems. A point that if
I ever knew it, I've since forgotten since the other entries are now
many years old. Relatively short term memory isn't so good at 86 yo.
Cheers, Gene Heskett
--
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable.
- Louis D. Brandeis
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>
Reply to: