Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Closed 6 years ago.
Improve this question
Simple question: I have a user called "user" on my system. This user has sudo privileges. Why can't I browse into the sudoer.d directory then?
Is it because cd is a built-in command?
[user#localhost etc]$ ls -al | grep sudoers.d
drwxr-x---. 2 root root 4096 Apr 4 18:09 sudoers.d
[user#localhost etc]$ sudo cd sudoers.d
[user#localhost etc]$ pwd
/etc
[user#localhost etc]$ sudo ls -la sudoers.d/
total 12
drwxr-x---. 2 root root 4096 Apr 4 18:09 .
drwxr-xr-x. 79 root root 4096 May 5 05:20 ..
-r--r-----. 1 root root 33 Apr 4 18:09 vagrant
[user#localhost etc]$ sudo vim sudoers.d/vagrant
[user#localhost etc]$
Thanks a lot.
It happens because sudo simply executes the command executable you pass to it with elevated privileges, and forwards the rest of arguments. Since cd is a shell builtin, sudo won't find the file to execute, which results in an error.
If you wish to have an interactive shell with elevated privileges, use sudo su
sudo opens a new shell. That shell changes its working directory. And then it exits. The original shell's working directory is never changed, nor can it be.
Related
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Closed 1 year ago.
Improve this question
It seems that both /bin/ls and /usr/bin/ls have the same inode (and the same sha-256 hash) but the number of hard links displayed by ls -li /usr/bin/ls /bin/ls is 1 instead of 2 :
user#debian:~/Documents/Unix$ ls -lai /usr/bin/ls /bin/ls
8258848 -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 147176 24 sept. 2020 /bin/ls
8258848 -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 147176 24 sept. 2020 /usr/bin/ls
Could somebody explain me what I have misunderstood?
I was puzzled for a while by this too, until I discovered this:
$ ls -ld /bin
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 7 May 31 02:39 /bin -> usr/bin
So /bin is just a symlink to /usr/bin, and there is really only one link to the file.
There are no differences between ls utility. You should know the difference is only between /bin and /usr/bin directories. /bin directory contains all programs that are used by system admin and all others users. /bin directory we can access whenever we want, but /usr/bin is accessible only for users that are locally logged.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Closed 2 years ago.
Improve this question
Ubuntu 20 LTS, Installed laradock,
in Ubuntu
$ pwd
/root/Docker
$ ls
blog laradock
$ rsync -a /media/sf_code/blog . && chmod -R 755 blog
$ cd laracock
$ docker-compose exec --user=root workspace bash
in docker
> ll
total 20
drwxr-xr-x 4 laradock laradock 4096 Nov 12 06:52 ./
drwxr-xr-x 1 root root 4096 Nov 12 02:30 ../
drwxr-xr-x 12 root 998 4096 Nov 12 03:09 blog/
drwxr-xr-x 74 laradock laradock 4096 Nov 12 06:35 laradock/
what does 998 mean?
The 4th column is the group id. It there is an entry in /etc/group with this id, then the group name will be printed otherwise the id.
The your example the group id of folder blog is 998 but no group exist inside the container with this id. Mapping a folder to a docker container does not change owner or group.
Some explanation can be found here
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Closed 3 years ago.
Improve this question
I created a new username called user01. Then, I used usermod to grant permissions with another user.
After that, I logged out and login as user 02 but can access to /home/user01
[user02#SRV01 ~]$ cd /home/user01/
-bash: cd: /home/user01/: Permission denied
I checked the directory and permisions of /home/user01 and user by this commands:
[user02#SRV01 ~]$ ls -ltrh / | grep home
drwxr-xr-x. 10 root root 4,0K feb 19 2019 home
[user02#SRV01 ~]$ ls -ltrh /home | grep user01
drwxrwxr-x+ 17 user01 user01 4,0K nov 26 18:14 user01
root#SRV01 /home # id user02
uid=509(user02) gid=500(user01) grupos=500(user01),511(user02)
What's the exactly problem? Thank's in advance
The plus sign at the end in the listing of user01 directory implies the use of ACL. (Access Control Lists)
For more information on the permissions, use getfacl command.
That should show that the user02 has read-execute access on the directory user01.
If the appropriate setting is not there, you'll need to do that using setfacl.
For example,
setfacl -m u:user02:x user01
setfacl -m u:user02:r user01
I hope this works!
You can play around with them after reading more on man page of the getfacl/setfacl commands.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
When I copy with a command such as:
cp -R /myfolder /home/backup/
Will the permissions such as 775 (drwxr-xr-x) persist?
Will the owner 'danny:danny' persist, or will the owner change to the person who actually made the copy?
you can run cp -a to preserve the ownership. Note that to preserve root permissions, you must run with sudo.
Without this flag, ownership is not preserved.
If a user copy a file he will become the owner of it.
$ mkdir d1 && touch d1/f1
$ sudo cp -R d1 d2
$ ls -l
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Oct 28 17:58 d2
$ ls -l d2/
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 Oct 28 17:58 f1
It is cp -p to preserve the timestamps,ownership and permissions check out http://unixhelp.ed.ac.uk/CGI/man-cgi?cp
Thanks & Regards,
Alok Thaker
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
On Ubuntu 12.04, the chown command doesn't seem to be working like it should
root#server:/var/www/folder/# ls -al
Running this puts out
drwxr-xr-x 11 776 sftponly 4096 Feb 17 14:08 Other_Folder
I need write permissions for the group, so I run:
chown -R 776 ./Other_Folder
Then when I run ls -al again, the output is still
drwxr-xr-x 11 776 sftponly 4096 Feb 17 14:08 Other_Folder
chown is used to change ownership of the file, not change permissions.
ls -al is not showing you who owns the file, just its permissions.
If root owns those files, you'll need to chown them properly, before you can change their permissions:
chown -R yourname:yourname folderName
Then as the owner you can change their permissions:
chmod -R 776 folderName
Edit:
I double checked the syntax and it seems to be right, you'll likely need to use sudo to use them.