>try to set up vstfpd server on raspberry Pi in have lying

>>59590499
>Remind me again why Linux is fucking useful?

because it keeps mouthbreathing retards like you away

>>59590521
Hey now, I used to use it all the time. Thought it was great, powerful, efficient, but honestly unless you are doing some commercial level embedded shit, it's really just inconvenient.

>cannot do simple tasks on computer

RUHHHHHHH WHY IS COMPUTERS SO HARD *flips table* RUHHHHH

>>59590807
If you can elegantly show how to change user permissions on a mounted drive in Raspbian while maintaining a constant predefined mount point in fstab and allow write permissions remotely to that point through vsftpd, I will accept your criticism and concede my computer illiteracy.

I will even put the table right side up.

>>59591178
I'm confident you'll be able to use google without our assistance

write support is disabled by default

>>59591293
I can, but that isn't relevant to what I just said.

Why set up ftp when you can just scp

>>59591693
I figured that much. Problem is I've edited the config file for it, and attempted to change owner and permissions on the mount point. I even went as far as making a new folder, setting the permissions, and making that the mount point afterwards. Still cannot convince it to let me write.

>>59591881
I'm not sure. Ftp is what I'm used to because I don't often have need for ssh or sftp, so never bothered with them. Previous servers were on Windows, so I only installed what was needed.

Is SCP a better way to go?

ssh is more common for secure file transfer on linux, and is much easier to setup
ftp nowadays is pretty much only used for anonymous stuff (since unencrypted non-anonymous stuff is a dumb idea, and why try to secure ftp when ssh exists?)
if you still don't care about security, nfs is a better option than ftp on linux

>>59591944
You get it for free with ssh, why wouldn't you use it? ftp is obsolete at this point

>>59592068
-- oh, and if windows interop is a concern, there's always samba (implements smb, which is what windows file sharing uses)
it's pretty easy to setup as well

>>59592072
Fair point. Any drawbacks to it?

>>59592140
pretty much just the fact that it's encrypted (can't turn it off), which means it can put some load on very low end machines when doing mass transfers

>>59592193
That's no big deal for what I need.

>>59590499
>vsftp

what the fuck are you doing nigger?

>>59592218
then just use that
you should already have ssh setup, as it's useful for other things as well (remote shell, tunnelling, etc)
for file transfer there's scp (like 'cp' but with ssh awareness) and sshfs (FUSE driver that allows you to mount a folder from a remote ssh server to your local filesystem)
you can even pipe to and from ssh servers

>>59591178
1: make a new folder like "/mnt/sdrive"

2: chown <owner>.<owner group>(optional) -R /mnt/sdrive

3: Make your fstab entry.

4: Restart or mount the drive.

If the mounted drive is NTFS or FAT steps 5 and 6 are not needed.

5: Set desirable RWX permissions with chmod -R XXX /mnt/sdrive

6: Set ownership again to affect the files recursively. chown <owner>.<owner group>(optional) -R /mnt/sdrive

Depending on your use case I would recommend you use nextcloud or another https based service for security and convenience anyway.

>>59592320
>4: Restart or mount the drive.
>restart
wow
you can effectively parse fstab with just "mount -a"

>>59590499
>cannot upload files to USB drive because wrong permissions
>cannot change permissions
>cannot change owner
very descriptive
i will surely be able to help you now

>>59592351

Normally I would agree but I have had issues with fstab configuration errors that are silent with "mount -a" and you end up finding out later when your system fails to boot. I find waiting the needed 10 seconds is not a big deal and gives me peace of mind I have not set any ticking time bombs. You can flame me for that if you want I don't care.

>>59592409
so use "mount -av" so it tells you if it was successful or not

>>59592454
Alright good to know I will use that next time. I am mainly a programmer so my unix skills are mostly on a need to know basis.

>>59591178
>predefined mount point in fstab
you realize that you can define ownership in fstab, right?

id in terminal will list relevant uid and gid (in my case 1000) that you can add to your fstab mount options, as uid=1000,gid=1000,etc,etc

it may be the case that you'll need to add another user id and change the ownership to that user. If I remember correctly, the raspbian server I set up set the ownership of everything I did to root, which caused some problems for any software that wasn't running as root.

right now you're complaining that a board and OS tailored for makers and computer education has a learning curve. either fuck off or learn to ask for help without being a cunt about it

>>59590499
Don't worry, friend! Your 4chan pals are here to help!

The problem your seeing is caused by your USB drive being formatted as FAT32 aka VFAT.

FAT32 is the lowest common denominator of file systems. It's simple and dumb, with almost no metadata.

The benefit of using FAT32 is that all operating systems can read the files. The downside is that no extended functionality like permissions and ownership is supported, and a secure default is chosen instead.

Sadly, this secure default was more restricted than you wanted! Your two choices are:

1. Use a more advanced file system, like ext4. This will allow proper access control, but no cross-platform mounting.

2. Use a less restricted default. You can do this with the mount command, specifically

-o uid=youruser,gid=yourgroup,umask=yourmask

.

You can additionally add the

remount

flag to change it on the fly.

It's never good when security and usability collide, but I hope you'll appreciate Linux's security features and safe defaults, even when you need to be more explicit in what you want to do.

Good luck, and thanks for choosing 4chan!

>>59590499
>Something isn't useful because I'm too retarded to use it

hi, is this the angry linux thread?

File: 1439319944793.jpg (95KB, 676x676px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 676x676px

>>59592702
No, this is the leather club.