Search Results

Search found 60744 results on 2430 pages for 'why we write'.

Page 14/2430 | < Previous Page | 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21  | Next Page >

  • Users suddenly missing write permissions to the root drive c within an active directory domain

    - by Kevin
    I'm managing an active directory single domain environment on some Windows Server 2008, Windows Server 2008 R2 and Windows Server 2012 machines. Since a few weeks I got a strange issue. Some users (not all!) report that they cannot any longer save, copy or write files to the root drive c, whether on their clients (vista, win 7) nor via remote desktop connection on a Windows Server 2008 machine. Even running programs that require direct write permissions to the root drive without administrator permissions fail to do so since then. The affected users have local administrator permissions. The question I'm facing now is: What caused this change of system behavior? Why did this happen? I didn't find out yet. What was the last thing I did before it happened? The last action that was made before it happened was the rollout of a GPO containing network drive mappings for the users depending on their security group membership. All network drives are located on a linux server with samba enabled. We did not change any UAC settings, and they have always been activated. However I can't imagine that rolling out this GPO caused the problem. Has anybody faced an issue like that? Just in case: I know that it is for a specific reason that an user without administrative privileges is prevented from writing to the root drive since windows vista and the implementation of UAC. I don't think that those users should be able to write to drive c, but I try to figure out why this is happening and a few weeks ago this was still working. I also know that a user who is a member of the local administrators group does not execute anything with administrator permissions per default unless he or she executes a program with this permissions. What did I do yet? I checked the permissions of the affected programs, the affected clients/server. Didn't find something special. I checked ALL of our GPOs if there exist any restrictions that could prevent the affected users from writing to the root drive. Did not find any settings. I checked the UAC settings of the affected users and compared those to other users that still can write to the root drive. Everything similar. I googled though the internet and tried to find someone who had a similar problem. Did not find one. Has anybody an idea? Thank you very much. Edit: The GPO that was rolled out does the following (Please excuse if the settings are not named exactly like that, I translated the settings into english): **Windows Settings -- Network Drive Mappings -- Drive N: -- General:** Action: Replace **Properties:** Letter: N Location: \\path-to-drive\drivename Re-Establish connection: deactivated Label as: Name_of_the_Share Use first available Option: deactivated **Windows Settings -- Network Drive Mappings -- Drive N: -- Public: Options:** On error don't process any further elements for this extension: no Run as the logged in user: no remove element if it is not applied anymore: no Only apply once: no **Securitygroup:** Attribute -- Value bool -- AND not -- 0 name -- domain\groupname sid -- sid-of-the-group userContext -- 1 primaryGroup -- 0 localGroup -- 0 **Securitygroup:** Attribute -- Value bool -- OR not -- 0 name -- domain\another-groupname sid -- sid-of-the-group userContext -- 1 primaryGroup -- 0 localGroup -- 0 Edit: The Error-Message of an affected users says the following: Due to an unexpected error you can't copy the file. Error-Code 0x80070522: The client is missing a required permission. The command icacls C: shows the following: NT-AUTORITY\SYSTEM:(OI)(CI)(F) PRE-DEFINED\Administrators:(OI)(CI)(F) computername\username:(OI)(CI)(F) A college just told me that also the primary domain-controller (PDC) changed from Windows Server 2008 to Windows Server 2012. That also may be a reason. Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Why is VB so popular?

    - by aaaidan
    To me, Visual Basic seems clumsy, ugly, error-prone, and difficult to read. I'll let others explain why. While VB.net has clearly been a huge leap forward for the language in terms of features, I still don't understand why anyone would choose to code in VB over, say, C#. However, I still see (what seems to be) the vast majority of commercial web apps from "MS shops" are built in VB. I could stand corrected on this, but VB still seems more popular than it deserves. Can anyone help answer any (or all) of these questions: Am I missing something with VB? Is it easier to learn, or "friendlier" than C#? Are there features I don't know about? Why is VB/VB.net so frequently used today, especially in web projects?

    Read the article

  • Why do browsers leak memory?

    - by Dane Balia
    A colleague and I were speaking about browsers (using a browser control object in a project), and it appears as plain as day that all browsers (Firefox, Chrome, IE, Opera) display the same characteristic or side-effect from their usage and that being 'Leaking Memory'. Can someone explain why that is the case? Surely as with any form of code, there should be proper garbage collection? PS. I've read about some defensive patterns on why this can happen from a developer's perspective. I am aware of an article Crockford wrote on IE; but why is the problem symptomatic of every browser? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Why is testing MVC Views frowned upon?

    - by Peter Bernier
    I'm currently setting the groundwork for an ASP.Net MVC application and I'm looking into what sort of unit-tests I should be prepared to write. I've seen in multiple places people essentially saying 'don't bother testing your views, there's no logic and it's trivial and will be covered by an integration test'. I don't understand how this has become the accepted wisdom. Integration tests serve an entirely different purpose than unit tests. If I break something, I don't want to know a half-hour later when my integration tests break, I want to know immediately. Sample Scenario : Lets say we're dealing with a standard CRUD app with a Customer entity. The customer has a name and an address. At each level of testing, I want to verify that the Customer retrieval logic gets both the name and the address properly. To unit-test the repository, I write an integration test to hit the database. To unit-test the business rules, I mock out the repository, feed the business rules appropriate data, and verify my expected results are returned. What I'd like to do : To unit-test the UI, I mock out the business rules, setup my expected customer instance, render the view, and verify that the view contains the appropriate values for the instance I specified. What I'm stuck doing : To unit-test the repository, I write an integration test, setup an appropriate login, create the required data in the database, open a browser, navigate to the customer, and verify the resulting page contains the appropriate values for the instance I specified. I realize that there is overlap between the two scenarios discussed above, but the key difference it time and effort required to setup and execute the tests. If I (or another dev) removes the address field from the view, I don't want to wait for the integration test to discover this. I want is discovered and flagged in a unit-test that gets multiple times daily. I get the feeling that I'm just not grasping some key concept. Can someone explain why wanting immediate test feedback on the validity of an MVC view is a bad thing? (or if not bad, then not the expected way to get said feedback)

    Read the article

  • HTG Explains: What Is Open-Source Software and Why You Should Care

    - by Chris Hoffman
    Geeks often describe programs as being “open source” or “free software.” If you’re wondering exactly what these terms mean and why they matter, read on. (No, “free software” doesn’t just mean that you can download it for free.) Whether a program is open-source or not doesn’t just matter to developers, it ultimately matters for users, too. Open-source software licenses give users freedoms they would not otherwise have. Image Credit: Quinn Dombrowski on Flickr How To Use USB Drives With the Nexus 7 and Other Android Devices Why Does 64-Bit Windows Need a Separate “Program Files (x86)” Folder? Why Your Android Phone Isn’t Getting Operating System Updates and What You Can Do About It

    Read the article

  • Why are so many DBCC commands undocumented?

    - by DBA
    Paul Randal of SQLskills.com does a great job of answering the question of why there are so many undocumented DBCC commands in his post Why are so many DBCC commands undocumented? I would like to go on to say that not only does this apply to the DBCC commands but is some respect to all parts of SQL, other Servers, IDE's, Operating Systems, just about everywhere. There is always something that just does not make it into the official documentation. And as Paul points out probably never will make it. That could be why there are so many "Tips & Tricks" types of books, blog post, etc. everywhere you look. And I also agree with Janos's comments on Paul's post, which was "I'm fine with them undocumented. All of us who need to use these commands know where to find "documentation" and whom to ask ". Till later,

    Read the article

  • Why is math taught "backwards"? [closed]

    - by Yorirou
    A friend of mine showed me a pretty practical Java example. It was a riddle. I got excited and quickly solved the problem. After it, he showed me the mathematical explanation of my solution (he proved why is it good), and it was completely clear for me. This seems like natural approach for me: solve problems, and generalize. This is very familiar to me, I do it all the time when I am programming: I write a function. When I have to write a similar function, I generalize the problem, grab the generic parts, and refactor them to a function, and solve the original problems as a specialization of the general function. At the university (or at least where I study), things work backwards. The professors shows just the highest possible level of the solutions ("cryptic" mathematical formulas). My problem is that this is too abstract for me. There is no connection of my previous knowledge (== reality in my sense), so even if I can understand it, I can't really learn it properly. Others are learning these formulas word-by-word, and get good grades, since they can write exactly the same to the test, but this is not an option for me. I am a curious person, I can learn interesting things, but I can't learn just text. My brain is for storing toughts, not strings. There are proofs for the theories, but they are also really hard to understand because of this, and in most of the cases they are omitted. What is the reason for this? I don't understand why is it a good idea to show the really high level of abstraction and then leave the practical connections (or some important ideas / practical motivations) out?

    Read the article

  • How do I write to an outer truecrypt volume when the inner volume protection prevents writng?

    - by con-f-use
    In a nutshell After some time using the outer volume of a hidden volume in Truecrypt I cannot write to the outer volume anymore. The protection of the inner volume always kicks in before. How do I fix this? Details I'm using truecrypt's two layered encryption of a USB stick. The outer container carries my semi-sensitive stuff while the inner hidden values has a bit more valuable information. I use both, the inner and outer volume regularly and that is part of the problem. Truecrypt can mount the outer volume for writing while protecting the inner. Usually the inner volume, when not protected this way (or mounted read-only) would be indistinguishable from free space. That is of course part of the plausible deniability scheme of truecrypt. At the beginning, everything worked as expected. I could copy and delete data to the outer volume as I pleased. Now it seams that I have written and deleted enough data to have filled the outer volume once. Despite the write protection Ubuntu tries now to write to the continuous "free space" that is the inner volume. It does that although enough other free space is on the outer volume. But on this free space there used to be data so its fragmented and the file system write prefers continuous space. The write on the continuous free space of the outer volume of course fails (with the error message in the picture above) as Truecrypt's inner-volume-protection kicks in. The Question I know this is expected behaviour, but is there a better way to write to the outer volume that does not attempt to write to the hidden free space at the end? The whole question could be more generally rephrased to: How do I control, where on a partition data is written in Ubuntu?

    Read the article

  • Why does Android make good coding so difficult?

    - by metacircle
    my daily work is writing tools in C#/WPF. After over more than 1 year on the job now, I came to love MVVM, IoC Containers, XAML (and more). It's pure fun to write code, since simple, maintainable and extendable code just comes naturally when you follow a few basic patterns. In my free time I really want to write some apps, mainly for my own personal use. I want to write apps for fun and not to make money or anything, that being said, paying an annual fee to be allowed to use my own apps on my own device is a total no-go for me. So I am not able to code for Windows Phone and am also not able to use Xamarin on Android (which is sad since Visual Studio + Resharper is programmers heaven). So I am stuck with Android "classic" Java development. Everytime I sit down at home to create an app, or improve some of the code I have already written I get annoyed very quick because getting good, decoupled code is just so hard to accomplish. It feels like everything you have to do in Android to create a good architecture is a workaround instead of being the way things are meant to be. Writing the UI in xml is fine, but everything else is one big code mess. Even all the tutorials do all their coding in the code behind. For 'hello world' this is fine, but for anything bigger this gets messy very very quick. This is where the fun for me ends. It's just no fun anymore because I just spend 90% of my time refactoring and thinking of workarounds how to make my code more maintainable with all the restrictions Android puts on me. Am I missing a crucial part or is this just the way Android is meant to be? Do you have any suggestions how to learn 'the fun way' of Android programming.

    Read the article

  • FPDF in PHP, setX just indents first row

    - by Cinaird
    I use FPDF to creat PDF from PHP and i have a problem with the Write() function i use the following code and i want to indent the text block not just the first row: $pdf->SetX(60); $pdf->Write(5,'' . str_repeat( ' This is a test of setX.', 30 )); but as you can understand it's just indents the first row, any idea on how to move the whole text mas?

    Read the article

  • Why does the rename() syscall prohibit moving a directory that I can't write to a different director

    - by Daniel Papasian
    I am trying to understand why this design decision was made with the rename() syscall in 4.2BSD. There's nothing I'm trying to solve here, just understand the rationale for the behavior itself. 4.2BSD saw the introduction of the rename() syscall for the purpose of allowing atomic renames/moves of files. From 4.3BSD-Reno/src/sys/ufs/ufs_vnops.c: /* * If ".." must be changed (ie the directory gets a new * parent) then the source directory must not be in the * directory heirarchy above the target, as this would * orphan everything below the source directory. Also * the user must have write permission in the source so * as to be able to change "..". We must repeat the call * to namei, as the parent directory is unlocked by the * call to checkpath(). */ if (oldparent != dp->i_number) newparent = dp->i_number; if (doingdirectory && newparent) { VOP_LOCK(fndp->ni_vp); error = ufs_access(fndp->ni_vp, VWRITE, tndp->ni_cred); VOP_UNLOCK(fndp->ni_vp); So clearly this check was added intentionally. My question is - why? Is this behavior supposed to be intuitive? The effect of this is that one cannot move a directory (located in a directory that one can write) that one cannot write to another directory that one can write to atomically. You can, however, create a new directory, move the links over (assuming one has read access to the directory), and then remove one's write bit on the directory. You just can't do so atomically. % cd /tmp % mkdir stackoverflow-question % cd stackoverflow-question % mkdir directory-1 % mkdir directory-2 % mkdir directory-1/directory-i-cant-write % echo "foo" > directory-1/directory-i-cant-write/contents % chmod 000 directory-1/directory-i-cant-write/contents % chmod 000 directory-1/directory-i-cant-write % mv directory-1/directory-i-cant-write directory-2 mv: rename directory-1/directory-i-cant-write to directory-2/directory-i-cant-write: Permission denied We now have a directory I can't write with contents I can't read that I can't move atomically. I can, however, achieve the same effect non-atomically by changing permissions, making the new directory, using ln to create the new links, and changing permissions. (Left as an exercise to the reader) . and .. are special cased already, so I don't particularly buy that it is intuitive that if I can't write a directory I can't "change .." which is what the source suggests. Is there any reason for this besides it being the perceived correct behavior by the author of the code? Is there anything bad that can happen if we let people atomically move directories (that they can't write) between directories that they can write?

    Read the article

  • Why Is Hibernation Still Used?

    - by Jason Fitzpatrick
    With the increased prevalence of fast solid-state hard drives, why do we still have system hibernation? Today’s Question & Answer session comes to us courtesy of SuperUser—a subdivision of Stack Exchange, a community-driven grouping of Q&A web sites. The Question SuperUser reader Moses wants to know why he should use hibernate on a desktop machine: I’ve never quite understood the original purpose of the Hibernation power state in Windows. I understand how it works, what processes take place, and what happens when you boot back up from Hibernate, but I’ve never truly understood why it’s used. With today’s technology, most notably with SSDs, RAM and CPUs becoming faster and faster, a cold boot on a clean/efficient Windows installation can be pretty fast (for some people, mere seconds from pushing the power button). Standby is even faster, sometimes instantaneous. Even SATA drives from 5-6 years ago can accomplish these fast boot times. Hibernation seems pointless to me [on desktop computers] when modern technology is considered, but perhaps there are applications that I’m not considering. What was the original purpose behind hibernation, and why do people still use it? Quite a few people use hibernate, so what is Moses missing in the big picture? The Answer SuperUser contributor Vignesh4304 writes: Normally hibernate mode saves your computer’s memory, this includes for example open documents and running applications, to your hard disk and shuts down the computer, it uses zero power. Once the computer is powered back on, it will resume everything where you left off. You can use this mode if you won’t be using the laptop/desktop for an extended period of time, and you don’t want to close your documents. Simple Usage And Purpose: Save electric power and resuming of documents. In simple terms this comment serves nice e.g (i.e. you will sleep but your memories are still present). Why it’s used: Let me describe one sample scenario. Imagine your battery is low on power in your laptop, and you are working on important projects on your machine. You can switch to hibernate mode – it will result your documents being saved, and when you power on, the actual state of application gets restored. Its main usage is like an emergency shutdown with an auto-resume of your documents. MagicAndre1981 highlights the reason we use hibernate everyday: Because it saves the status of all running programs. I leave all my programs open and can resume working the next day very easily. Doing a real boot would require to start all programs again, load all the same files into those programs, get to the same place that I was at before, and put all my windows in exactly the same place. Hibernating saves a lot of work pulling these things back up again. It’s not unusual to find computers around the office here that have been hibernated day in and day out for months without an actual full system shutdown and restart. It’s enormously convenient to freeze your work space at the exact moment you stopped working and to turn right around and resume there the next morning. Have something to add to the explanation? Sound off in the the comments. Want to read more answers from other tech-savvy Stack Exchange users? Check out the full discussion thread here.     

    Read the article

  • Why Are We Here?

    - by Jonathan Mills
    Back in the early 2000s, Toyota had a vision of building the number one best selling minivan in North America. Their current minivan, the Sienna, was small, underpowered, and badly needed help.  Yuji Yokoya was given the job of re-engineering the Sienna. There was just one problem, Yuji, lived in Japan. He did not know the people or places that he would be engineering for. Believe it or not, Japan is nothing like North America. So, what does a chief engineer do in a situation like that? He packed up his team and flew halfway around the world. He made a commitment to drive through every state in the US, every province in Canada, and Mexico. He met the people and drove the roads that the Sienna would be driving. And guess what, what he learned on that trip revolutionized the Sienna. The innovations he made, sent the Sienna to number one. Why? Because he knew who he was building his product for. He knew, why he was there.Let me ask you this, do you know why you are building what you are building? As a member of a product team, can you tell me how your product will be used in the real world? As you are writing code, building test plans, writing stories, or any of the other project tasks, can you picture the face of a person who will be using what you are building? All to often, the answer to those questions is, no. Why is it important? Because, every day, project team members make assumptions. Over a given project, it is safe to say project team members will make thousands of assumptions about what they are doing. And all to often, those assumptions are not quite right. Its not that they are not good at their job, its just that they don’t really know why they are there.So, what to do? First and foremost, stop doing what you are doing. Yes, really. Schedule some time to go visit the people who will be using your product. Don’t invite them to you, go to them. Watch them work. Interact with them. Ask them questions. Maybe even try it out yourself. This serves two purposes. One, It shows them that you care about them. They will be far more engaged in your project if they feel like you care. And nothing says you care more that spending some time. Second, if gives you the proper frame of reference for you work. It gives you something tangible to go back to as you are building your product. As you make the thousands of assumptions that you will make over the life of your project, it gives you something to see in your mind that makes it real to you.Ultimately, setting a proper frame of reference is critical to the overall success of a project. The funny thing is, it really does not even take that long. In most cases, a 2-3 hour session will give you most of what you need to get the right insight. For the project, it will be the best 2 hours you could spend.

    Read the article

  • Why is 0 false?

    - by Morwenn
    This question may sound dumb, but why does 0 evaluates to false and any other [integer] value to true is most of programming languages? String comparison Since the question seems a little bit too simple, I will explain myself a little bit more: first of all, it may seem evident to any programmer, but why wouldn't there be a programming language - there may actually be, but not any I used - where 0 evaluates to true and all the other [integer] values to false? That one remark may seem random, but I have a few examples where it may have been a good idea. First of all, let's take the example of strings three-way comparison, I will take C's strcmp as example: any programmer trying C as his first language may be tempted to write the following code: if (strcmp(str1, str2)) { // Do something... } Since strcmp returns 0 which evaluates to false when the strings are equal, what the beginning programmer tried to do fails miserably and he generally does not understand why at first. Had 0 evaluated to true instead, this function could have been used in its most simple expression - the one above - when comparing for equality, and the proper checks for -1 and 1 would have been done only when needed. We would have considered the return type as bool (in our minds I mean) most of the time. Moreover, let's introduce a new type, sign, that just takes values -1, 0 and 1. That can be pretty handy. Imagine there is a spaceship operator in C++ and we want it for std::string (well, there already is the compare function, but spaceship operator is more fun). The declaration would currently be the following one: sign operator<=>(const std::string& lhs, const std::string& rhs); Had 0 been evaluated to true, the spaceship operator wouldn't even exist, and we could have declared operator== that way: sign operator==(const std::string& lhs, const std::string& rhs); This operator== would have handled three-way comparison at once, and could still be used to perform the following check while still being able to check which string is lexicographically superior to the other when needed: if (str1 == str2) { // Do something... } Old errors handling We now have exceptions, so this part only applies to the old languages where no such thing exist (C for example). If we look at C's standard library (and POSIX one too), we can see for sure that maaaaany functions return 0 when successful and any integer otherwise. I have sadly seen some people do this kind of things: #define TRUE 0 // ... if (some_function() == TRUE) { // Here, TRUE would mean success... // Do something } If we think about how we think in programming, we often have the following reasoning pattern: Do something Did it work? Yes -> That's ok, one case to handle No -> Why? Many cases to handle If we think about it again, it would have made sense to put the only neutral value, 0, to yes (and that's how C's functions work), while all the other values can be there to solve the many cases of the no. However, in all the programming languages I know (except maybe some experimental esotheric languages), that yes evaluates to false in an if condition, while all the no cases evaluate to true. There are many situations when "it works" represents one case while "it does not work" represents many probable causes. If we think about it that way, having 0 evaluate to true and the rest to false would have made much more sense. Conclusion My conclusion is essentially my original question: why did we design languages where 0 is false and the other values are true, taking in account my few examples above and maybe some more I did not think of? Follow-up: It's nice to see there are many answers with many ideas and as many possible reasons for it to be like that. I love how passionate you seem to be about it. I originaly asked this question out of boredom, but since you seem so passionate, I decided to go a little further and ask about the rationale behind the Boolean choice for 0 and 1 on Math.SE :)

    Read the article

  • read and write permission for FAT32 partition in Ubuntu

    - by Dean
    This is a strange problem. I have the following partition table Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sda1 * 1 13 102400 7 HPFS/NTFS Partition 1 does not end on cylinder boundary. /dev/sda2 13 5737 45978624 7 HPFS/NTFS /dev/sda3 5738 10600 39062047+ 83 Linux /dev/sda4 10601 19457 71143852+ 5 Extended /dev/sda5 10601 11208 4883728+ 82 Linux swap / Solaris /dev/sda6 11209 15033 30720000 b W95 FAT32 /dev/sda7 15033 19457 35537920 7 HPFS/NTFS I dual boot Win7 (sda2) and Ubuntu (sda3) and wanted to use the FAT23 partition to share files across two OS's. I followed some online tutorial and have done these: sudo mkdir /media/FAT32 sudo chmod 777 /media/FAT32 sudo mount /dev/sda6/ /media/FAT32 after I mounted the file, I can only read but not be able to write to it. I checked the file permission, it becomes: drwxr-xr-x but after I unmounted the it then becomes drwxrwxrwx and I can read and write to it. very strange. I don't know where I've down wrong. Cheers.

    Read the article

  • Pysdm has disabled my ability to write to my storage partition

    - by Atlas
    I have a dual boot setup with Windows 7 and Mint 13 Cinnamon. As well as their respective partitions I also have a large one (NTFS) for storing all my music, videos, documents etc. I downloaded pysdm as I was told it would enable me to configure Linux to auto-mount my storage partition. It has indeed been helpful in auto-mounting my storage. However, since installing it I can no longer write to the partition which makes 500GB of my hard drive utterly useless! I've tried to unselect the "Mount file system in read only mode" option, but the program keeps re-checking it after I close that window (and even when I click apply). Why is it doing this and how can I get it to recognise that I need to read AND write on that partition?

    Read the article

  • Windows XP - removing write protection for usb drives

    - by Arnold
    I have a laptop who used to belong to my company and when I plug in a usb memory drive, I cannot write any files to it. This is because company policy did not allow writing to usb drives without a special authorization (to prevent theft of files). However the laptop is now mine, and I was given the administrator password, so I am guessing that as administrator I can remove this protection somehow. How can I do this? Currently if I try to copy a file to the drive, Windows simply tells me that the drive is write-protected, whatever usb drive I plug in. Maybe it is some registry setting? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • UNRAID V4.7: Lost write permission on Win7/Android devices

    - by JROC
    I'm currently running V4.7 and I haven't touched any of the user or share settings, and I'm periodically losing read.write permission on both my windows 7 pc and my android tablet connecting over the wireless. Sometime I can access my shares and see the folder directories, but when attempting to open a folder windows denies me access saying I don't have the proper permission. This is after I have logged in with my main account that has full read/write access of everything, same on my android device. This all started when I attempted to delete a large amount of files (8gb) to make more room and about half way through started getting permission errors. What could be causing this? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Unable to write into character device file in Ubuntu

    - by Surjya Narayana Padhi
    I just written a linux character driver. I created one character device file named X. I can see that file in /dev folder. Now I want to do some read/write operation into this file. I opened the filed in VI editor and write some text into it. I used :wq and exited. It didn't show any error. Now when I do cat on that same file I am not able to see any content. I tried it several times. The same situation. Please let me know If I am doing something wrong....

    Read the article

  • Give apache write access to DocumentRoot on dev server

    - by Abhi Beckert
    I've got apache running on my mac workstation (OS X 10.7, with the pre-installed copy of apache), and our web applications require write access to certain sections of the filesystem to run (usually just a tmp dir, but sometimes more than that). We have (literally) thousands of clients, and I want to be able to quickly grab a copy of any website's code, and have it "just work", however I always need to manually modify the unix permissions of specific directories after pulling a client's website out of source control (the list of directories varies from one client to another, as it has changed over the years). Since it's a dev server, firewalled off from the general internet, I would like to give apache/php write access to the entire DocumentRoot. How can I do this? I tried chmod 777 on the DocumentRoot, but if I create a directory inside it, the permissions are still 755 (owner: me, group: wheel). I think there should be a way to force all files created inside DocumentRoot to be 777 or perhaps 775, with the _www user added to the wheel group?

    Read the article

  • problems with WindowsImageBackup and write protected drives

    - by Ralph Shillington
    On Windows 7 I created a System image of my computer (C: and reserved partition) onto a USB drive. No problem. I then formatted the C: and installed the OS -- no problem Now I would like use the System Image and get back some of my documents etc. But I can't get access wo the WindowsImageBackup folder on the USB drive 1) Somehow the drive is write protected --- how did that happen? How do I unprotect that drive. 2) I can't access the WindowsImageBackup folder because I suspect the ACL is out of wack with my new SID. I would add my new SID to the ACL but I can't because the drive is write protected At the moment I'm completely disconnected from my files, which I thought (and still hope) are backed up. Understandably, panic is now setting in.

    Read the article

  • Windows - Delayed Write Failed error on USB hard drive

    - by ndngrd
    I've got a new Verbatim 1.5TB USB hard drive (Samsung HD154UI) and I'm finding myself completely unable to fill it. I'm using Windows XP. Whenever I try to copy a load of files over, it works for some time (will copy over between 20 and 90GB) but eventually stops with an error saying "The specified path is too deep" - the specified is not too deep, there's nothing more than 2 dirs deep that I'm copying. A balloon pops up at the bottom saying "Windows - Delayed Write Failed" telling me the data could not be copied. This wouldn't be too bad if I could just restart the transfer, but after this error has happened I can't write anything else to the disk - including if I eject it and then connect it to another machine. It just seems completely locked. The only way I can unlock it is to delete everything that I was copying to it. I've tried various USB cables and copying from different machines, and the same thing keeps happening.

    Read the article

  • Write to windows share

    - by aidan
    I used to mount a windows share in Ubuntu server, with an entry in fstab: //data/SharedFolder /media/SharedFolder/ smbfs user,defaults,credentials=/root/.creds,uid=root,gid=root 0 0 /root/.creds is a text file with three lines, my username, password and domain. Users on the ubuntu server could write to this mount, but then I upgraded to 10.04 and now only root can write. Regular users can still read though. mount currently tells me: //data/SharedFolder on /media/SharedFolder type cifs (rw,mand,noexec,nosuid,nodev) How do I make it world writeable again? Thanks

    Read the article

  • icacls in windows 7 does not give full permission to write files in root drive

    - by Menuta
    icacls in windows 7 does not give full permission to write files in root drive. We have a very old application based on Omnis7 that needs to create and read/write files on drive C: when running as a restricted user. In Windows XP to give this permission is quite trivial using cacls. cacls C:\ /G Everyone:(C) The equivalent icacls in Windows 7 will not work. icacls C:\ /Grant Everyone:(M) I have also tried the following. icacls C:\ /Grant Everyone:(F) icacls C:\ /Grant Domain\user:(F) trying to create file with a restricted user gives this C:\>copy nul text.txt Access is denied. 0 file(s) copied. After applying the icacls permissions above the result changes to this. C:\>copy nul text.txt A required privilege is not held by the client. 0 file(s) copied. Is this an issue with the way I am applying the permissions? Or is Window 7 being extremely strict?

    Read the article

  • Piping powershell messages to Write-EventLog

    - by Richard
    I have a powershell script that runs a custom cmdlet. It is run by Task Scheduler and I want to log what it does. This is my current crude version: Add-PsSnapIn PianolaCmdlets Write-EventLog -LogName "Windows Powershell" -Source "Powershell" -Message "Starting Update-EbuNumbers" -EventId 0 Get-ClubMembers -HasTemporaryEbuNumber -show all | Update-EbuNumbers -Verbose Write-EventLog -LogName "Windows Powershell" -Source "Powershell" -Message "Finished Update-EbuNumbers" -EventId 0 What I would like to do is log the output of my custom cmdlet. Ideally I'd like to create different types of event log entries based on whether it was a warning or a verbose message. Update: I don't want to log the return value of the commandlet. The Update-EbuMembers cmdlet does not return an object. I want to log any verbose messages written by WriteVerbose and I want to log errors created by ThrowTerminatingError.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21  | Next Page >