Debian Bug report logs - #774149
usbmount: Can't mount ntfs drive (Transport endpoint is not connected)

Toggle useless messages

Message #5 received at submit@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Rob Gom <rgom.debian@gmail.com>

To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>

Subject: usbmount: Can't mount ntfs drive

Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2014 14:22:50 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Package: usbmount
Version: 0.0.22
Severity: important

Dear Maintainer,
I'm trying to use usbmount to automount my pendrive formatted as ntfs.
For that I only added ntfs to list of filesystems to /etc/usbmount config.
Unfortunately, it doesn't work. After plugging in the device what I get is:
[carramba@~]$ ls -la /media
ls: cannot access /media/usb0: Transport endpoint is not connected
total 1
drwxr-xr-x 13 root root 336 gru 28 13:30 .
drwxr-xr-x 24 root root 712 gru 29 13:23 ..
drwxr-xr-x  2 root root  88 sty  2  2010 hdc
drwxr-xr-x  2 root root  88 gru 26 21:05 sdb1
drwxr-xr-x  2 root root  88 mar  5  2012 sr0
lrwxrwxrwx  1 root root   4 gru 28 13:30 usb -> usb0
??????????  ? ?    ?      ?            ? usb0
drwxr-xr-x  2 root root  48 gru 28 13:30 usb1
drwxr-xr-x  2 root root  48 gru 28 13:30 usb2
drwxr-xr-x  2 root root  48 maj 17  2014 usb3
drwxr-xr-x  2 root root  48 gru 28 13:30 usb4
drwxr-xr-x  2 root root  48 gru 28 13:30 usb5
drwxr-xr-x  2 root root  48 gru 28 13:30 usb6
drwxr-xr-x  2 root root  48 gru 28 13:30 usb7

The device seems to be mounted, though:
/dev/sdb1 on /media/usb0 type fuseblk
(rw,nodev,noexec,noatime,user_id=0,group_id=0,allow_other,blksize=4096)

/var/log/user.log contains the following (don't know why the device is
present twice):
Dec 28 13:55:50 dom mtp-probe: checking bus 2, device 3:
"/sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:06.1/usb2/2-3"
Dec 28 13:55:50 dom mtp-probe: bus: 2, device: 3 was not an MTP device
Dec 28 13:55:52 dom usbmount[2330]: /dev/sdc does not contain a filesystem
or disklabel
Dec 28 13:55:52 dom usbmount[2360]: executing command: mount -tntfs
-onoexec,nodev,noatime,nodiratime /dev/sdc1 /media/usb1
Dec 28 13:55:52 dom usbmount[2360]: executing command: run-parts
/etc/usbmount/mount.d
Dec 28 13:57:37 dom mtp-probe: checking bus 2, device 4:
"/sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:06.1/usb2/2-3"
Dec 28 13:57:37 dom mtp-probe: bus: 2, device: 4 was not an MTP device
Dec 28 13:57:38 dom usbmount[2479]: /dev/sdb does not contain a filesystem
or disklabel
Dec 28 13:57:39 dom usbmount[2509]: executing command: mount -tntfs
-onoexec,nodev,noatime,nodiratime /dev/sdb1 /media/usb0
Dec 28 13:57:39 dom usbmount[2509]: executing command: run-parts
/etc/usbmount/mount.d

When executing the command above manually (after umount/pumount)
(mount -tntfs -onoexec,nodev,noatime,nodiratime /dev/sdb1 /media/usb0)
everything is fine.

The device is reported by dmesg as:
[    3.454987] scsi 6:0:0:0: Direct-Access     Generic  Flash Disk
8.07 PQ: 0 ANSI: 4
[    3.456324] sd 6:0:0:0: Attached scsi generic sg2 type 0
[    3.457985] sd 6:0:0:0: [sdb] 15687680 512-byte logical blocks: (8.03
GB/7.48 GiB)
[    3.459325] sd 6:0:0:0: [sdb] Write Protect is off
[    3.459334] sd 6:0:0:0: [sdb] Mode Sense: 23 00 00 00
[    3.461438] sd 6:0:0:0: [sdb] Write cache: disabled, read cache:
enabled, doesn't support DPO or FUA
[    3.481088]  sdb: sdb1
[    3.487444] sd 6:0:0:0: [sdb] Attached SCSI removable disk


Best regards,
Robert

-- System Information:
Debian Release: 8.0
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing'), (500, 'stable'), (1,
'experimental')
Architecture: i386 (i686)

Kernel: Linux 3.16.0-4-686-pae (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=pl_PL.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=pl_PL.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)

Versions of packages usbmount depends on:
ii  lockfile-progs  0.1.17
ii  udev            215-8
ii  util-linux      2.25.2-4

Versions of packages usbmount recommends:
ii  pmount  0.9.23-3+b1

usbmount suggests no packages.

-- Configuration Files:
/etc/usbmount/usbmount.conf changed:
ENABLED=1
MOUNTPOINTS="/media/usb0 /media/usb1 /media/usb2 /media/usb3
             /media/usb4 /media/usb5 /media/usb6 /media/usb7"
FILESYSTEMS="vfat ext2 ext3 ext4 hfsplus ntfs"
MOUNTOPTIONS="noexec,nodev,noatime,nodiratime"
FS_MOUNTOPTIONS=""
VERBOSE=yes


-- no debconf information

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Message #10 received at 774149@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Mathieu Malaterre <malat@debian.org>

To: 774149@bugs.debian.org

Subject: same here

Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 16:56:59 +0100

For some reason this stopped working in jessie for me (works fine in wheezy).

I could not tell if the issue is related to the fact that `fuse` does
not create anymore a fuse group (hence my user is not in fuse group)
or if something broke at systemd level.

Logs:



$ tail -f debug
[...]
Feb 25 16:53:26 vostrodell kernel: [31382.232518] sd 7:0:0:0: [sdf]
Mode Sense: 1f 00 00 08
Feb 25 16:53:26 vostrodell usbmount[21297]: loaded usbmount configurations
Feb 25 16:53:26 vostrodell usbmount[21297]: trying to acquire lock
/var/run/usbmount/.mount.lock
Feb 25 16:53:26 vostrodell usbmount[21297]: acquired lock
/var/run/usbmount/.mount.lock
Feb 25 16:53:26 vostrodell usbmount[21326]: loaded usbmount configurations
Feb 25 16:53:26 vostrodell usbmount[21326]: trying to acquire lock
/var/run/usbmount/.mount.lock
Feb 25 16:53:26 vostrodell usbmount[21326]: acquired lock
/var/run/usbmount/.mount.lock
Feb 25 16:53:26 vostrodell usbmount[21326]: /dev/sdf1 contains
filesystem type ntfs
Feb 25 16:53:26 vostrodell usbmount[21326]: mountpoint /media/usb0 is
available for /dev/sdf1
Feb 25 16:53:27 vostrodell usbmount[21326]: usbmount execution finished

$ tail -f syslog
[...]
Feb 25 16:53:23 vostrodell kernel: [31379.115477] usb 2-1.3: new
high-speed USB device number 6 using ehci-pci
Feb 25 16:53:23 vostrodell mtp-probe: checking bus 2, device 6:
"/sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:1d.0/usb2/2-1/2-1.3"
Feb 25 16:53:23 vostrodell mtp-probe: bus: 2, device: 6 was not an MTP device
Feb 25 16:53:23 vostrodell kernel: [31379.208423] usb 2-1.3: New USB
device found, idVendor=0411, idProduct=01e7
Feb 25 16:53:23 vostrodell kernel: [31379.208426] usb 2-1.3: New USB
device strings: Mfr=1, Product=2, SerialNumber=3
Feb 25 16:53:23 vostrodell kernel: [31379.208428] usb 2-1.3: Product: HD-PNTU3
Feb 25 16:53:23 vostrodell kernel: [31379.208429] usb 2-1.3:
Manufacturer: BUFFALO
Feb 25 16:53:23 vostrodell kernel: [31379.208430] usb 2-1.3:
SerialNumber: 00000100FABE
Feb 25 16:53:23 vostrodell kernel: [31379.208697] usb-storage
2-1.3:1.0: USB Mass Storage device detected
Feb 25 16:53:23 vostrodell kernel: [31379.208950] scsi7 : usb-storage 2-1.3:1.0
Feb 25 16:53:26 vostrodell kernel: [31382.230511] scsi 7:0:0:0:
Direct-Access     BUFFALO  HD-PNTU3         0001 PQ: 0 ANSI: 6
Feb 25 16:53:26 vostrodell kernel: [31382.230841] sd 7:0:0:0: Attached
scsi generic sg5 type 0
Feb 25 16:53:26 vostrodell kernel: [31382.231516] sd 7:0:0:0: [sdf]
1953463728 512-byte logical blocks: (1.00 TB/931 GiB)
Feb 25 16:53:26 vostrodell kernel: [31382.232516] sd 7:0:0:0: [sdf]
Write Protect is off
Feb 25 16:53:26 vostrodell kernel: [31382.232518] sd 7:0:0:0: [sdf]
Mode Sense: 1f 00 00 08
Feb 25 16:53:26 vostrodell kernel: [31382.233484] sd 7:0:0:0: [sdf] No
Caching mode page found
Feb 25 16:53:26 vostrodell kernel: [31382.233486] sd 7:0:0:0: [sdf]
Assuming drive cache: write through
Feb 25 16:53:26 vostrodell kernel: [31382.240867]  sdf: sdf1
Feb 25 16:53:26 vostrodell kernel: [31382.244231] sd 7:0:0:0: [sdf]
Attached SCSI disk
Feb 25 16:53:26 vostrodell usbmount[21297]: loaded usbmount configurations
Feb 25 16:53:26 vostrodell usbmount[21297]: trying to acquire lock
/var/run/usbmount/.mount.lock
Feb 25 16:53:26 vostrodell usbmount[21297]: acquired lock
/var/run/usbmount/.mount.lock
Feb 25 16:53:26 vostrodell usbmount[21297]: /dev/sdf does not contain
a filesystem or disklabel
Feb 25 16:53:26 vostrodell usbmount[21326]: loaded usbmount configurations
Feb 25 16:53:26 vostrodell usbmount[21326]: trying to acquire lock
/var/run/usbmount/.mount.lock
Feb 25 16:53:26 vostrodell usbmount[21326]: acquired lock
/var/run/usbmount/.mount.lock
Feb 25 16:53:26 vostrodell usbmount[21326]: /dev/sdf1 contains
filesystem type ntfs
Feb 25 16:53:26 vostrodell usbmount[21326]: mountpoint /media/usb0 is
available for /dev/sdf1
Feb 25 16:53:26 vostrodell usbmount[21326]: executing command: mount
-tntfs -osync,noexec,nodev,noatime,nodiratime /dev/sdf1 /media/usb0
Feb 25 16:53:27 vostrodell ntfs-3g[21357]: Version 2014.2.15AR.2
integrated FUSE 28
Feb 25 16:53:27 vostrodell ntfs-3g[21357]: Mounted /dev/sdf1
(Read-Write, label "HD-PNTU3", NTFS 3.1)
Feb 25 16:53:27 vostrodell ntfs-3g[21357]: Cmdline options:
rw,sync,noexec,nodev,noatime,nodiratime
Feb 25 16:53:27 vostrodell ntfs-3g[21357]: Mount options:
rw,sync,noexec,nodev,nodiratime,allow_other,nonempty,noatime,fsname=/dev/sdf1,blkdev,blksize=4096
Feb 25 16:53:27 vostrodell ntfs-3g[21357]: Ownership and permissions
disabled, configuration type 7
Feb 25 16:53:27 vostrodell usbmount[21326]: executing command:
run-parts /etc/usbmount/mount.d
Feb 25 16:53:27 vostrodell usbmount[21326]: usbmount execution finished
Feb 25 16:54:14 vostrodell bumblebeed[21408]: [31436.896616] [ERROR]No
discrete video card found, quitting
Feb 25 16:54:14 vostrodell systemd[1]: bumblebeed.service: main
process exited, code=exited, status=1/FAILURE
Feb 25 16:54:14 vostrodell systemd[1]: Unit bumblebeed.service entered
failed state.
Feb 25 16:55:14 vostrodell bumblebeed[21411]: [31497.146602] [ERROR]No
discrete video card found, quitting
Feb 25 16:55:14 vostrodell systemd[1]: bumblebeed.service: main
process exited, code=exited, status=1/FAILURE
Feb 25 16:55:14 vostrodell systemd[1]: Unit bumblebeed.service entered
failed state.
Feb 25 16:56:14 vostrodell bumblebeed[21416]: [31557.396780] [ERROR]No
discrete video card found, quitting
Feb 25 16:56:14 vostrodell systemd[1]: bumblebeed.service: main
process exited, code=exited, status=1/FAILURE
Feb 25 16:56:14 vostrodell systemd[1]: Unit bumblebeed.service entered
failed state.


What's odd is that vfat is working nicely.

My setup is:

$ cat /etc/usbmount/usbmount.conf
[...]
FILESYSTEMS="vfat ext2 ext3 ext4 fuseblk ntfs-3g ntfs hfsplus"

Message #15 received at 774149@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Mathieu Malaterre <malat@debian.org>

To: 774149 <774149@bugs.debian.org>

Subject: Re: same here

Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 17:01:56 +0100

retitle -1 usbmount: Can't mount ntfs drive (Transport endpoint is not
connected)

Actually when playing a little more, if you are quick you can see two
things (unplug/plug the usb key):

If you are quickl enough:
$ ls /media/usb0
-> properly list the files

Then a few seconds later:
$ ls /media/usb0
/bin/ls: cannot access /media/usb0: Transport endpoint is not connected

Message #22 received at 774149@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Mathieu Malaterre <malat@debian.org>

To: 774149 <774149@bugs.debian.org>

Subject: Re: Bug#774149: same here

Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 17:24:33 +0100

On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 5:01 PM, Mathieu Malaterre <malat@debian.org> wrote:
> retitle -1 usbmount: Can't mount ntfs drive (Transport endpoint is not
> connected)
>
> Actually when playing a little more, if you are quick you can see two
> things (unplug/plug the usb key):
>
> If you are quickl enough:
> $ ls /media/usb0
> -> properly list the files
>
> Then a few seconds later:
> $ ls /media/usb0
> /bin/ls: cannot access /media/usb0: Transport endpoint is not connected

What's really annoying is that I can no longer mount by hand:

$ sudo mount -tntfs -onoexec,nodev,noatime,nodiratime /dev/sdf1 /tmp/foo
Mount is denied because the NTFS volume is already exclusively opened.
The volume may be already mounted, or another software may use it which
could be identified for example by the help of the 'fuser' command.

I need to first `umount` it (even if it does not appear in `df` output).

Message #27 received at 774149@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Rogério Brito <rbrito@ime.usp.br>

To: Mathieu Malaterre <malat@debian.org>, 774149@bugs.debian.org

Cc: 774149-submitter@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#774149: same here

Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2015 02:07:30 -0300

Hi, Mathieu and others.

On Feb 25 2015, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
(...)
> I need to first `umount` it (even if it does not appear in `df` output).
(...)

Do you want to adopt usbmount? I'm currently focused on other packages and
usbmount could really use another maintainer (or co-maintainer)...


Regards,

-- 
Rogério Brito : rbrito@{ime.usp.br,gmail.com} : GPG key 4096R/BCFCAAAA
http://cynic.cc/blog/ : github.com/rbrito : profiles.google.com/rbrito
DebianQA: http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=rbrito%40ime.usp.br

Message #35 received at 774149@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Mathieu Malaterre <malat@debian.org>

To: Rogério Brito <rbrito@ime.usp.br>

Cc: 774149 <774149@bugs.debian.org>, Hagen Fuchs <code@hfuchs.net>

Subject: Re: Bug#774149: same here

Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2015 13:44:14 +0100

Rogério,

On Sun, Mar 1, 2015 at 6:07 AM, Rogério Brito <rbrito@ime.usp.br> wrote:
> Hi, Mathieu and others.
>
> On Feb 25 2015, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
> (...)
>> I need to first `umount` it (even if it does not appear in `df` output).
> (...)
>
> Do you want to adopt usbmount? I'm currently focused on other packages and
> usbmount could really use another maintainer (or co-maintainer)...

Thanks for the offer ! However I clearly lack the time and skills to
help you with usbmount. Maybe some other people would be interested in
helping you, I took the liberty to CC Hagen here.

I would recommend you fill an RFH, or tag a couple of bugs `tags -1
help` to make it clear you are looking for help.

Regards and thanks for maintaining usbmount !

Message #42 received at 774149@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Mathieu Malaterre <malat@debian.org>

To: 774149 <774149@bugs.debian.org>, usbmount@packages.debian.org

Subject: usbmount : udev vs fuse

Date: Wed, 13 May 2015 13:07:04 +0200

Here are my conclusions:

1. As per comment from ArchWiki:

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Udev#About_udev_rules
[...]
Warning: To mount removable drives, do not call mount from udev rules.
In case of FUSE filesystems, you will get Transport endpoint not
connected errors. Instead use udisks that handles automount correctly.
[...]

2. Adding ntfs-3g to FILESYSTEMS *never* work because the `in_list`
implementation does:

$ cat /usr/share/usbmount/usbmount
[...]
in_list()
{
    for v in $2; do
[ "$1" != "$v" ] || return 0
    done
    return 1
}
[...]

Which means that for `ntfs` in_list will always returns an error when
matched against `ntfs-3g` driver. The documentation is clearly wrong.
So user should always add `ntfs` in FILESYSTEMS (mount will then use
ntfs-3g)

3. There is a typo in:

$ zmore /usr/share/doc/usbmount/README.gz
[...]
* add "fuseblk" to /etc/usb/usbmount.conf's variable FILESYSTEMS
  (for unmounting purposes).
[...]

It should read `/etc/usbmount/usbmount.conf` instead.


4. The documentation states that one should use:

[...]
The latter can be accomplished by the use of the command

udevadm trigger --action=add /dev/sdd2
[...]

But `trigger` action does not take a `devpath`

`5. It is not clear why usbmount rules are located in
`/lib/udev/rules.d/usbmount.rules` while I assumed it should be in
`/etc/udev/rules.d`


Because of 1, I am tempted to mark this bug as grave, since it prevent
user from mount fuse system. From jessie on, the default ntfs backend
is now always ntfs-3g (fuse) which means usbmount will not be able to
mount any ntfs USB key in the future.

Comments ?

Message #47 received at 774149@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Mathieu Malaterre <malat@debian.org>

To: 774149 <774149@bugs.debian.org>

Subject: Re: Bug#774149: usbmount : udev vs fuse

Date: Tue, 19 May 2015 17:14:12 +0200

Control: severity -1 grave

On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 1:07 PM, Mathieu Malaterre <malat@debian.org> wrote:
> Because of 1, I am tempted to mark this bug as grave, since it prevent

https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2015/05/msg00440.html

Message #54 received at 774149@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Mathieu Malaterre <malat@debian.org>

To: 774149 <774149@bugs.debian.org>

Date: Tue, 19 May 2015 17:22:00 +0200

In case usbmount gets removed, a linux-only alternative can be found
with udisks2.

Message #59 received at 774149@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: shirish शिरीष <shirishag75@gmail.com>

To: 774149@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Is there a workaround for the Can't mount ntfs drive (Transport endpoint is not connected)

Date: Sun, 7 Jun 2015 17:17:08 +0530

Hi all,
I just got hit by few days back, got time and was able to track it down :-

Before insertion of the external hdd

[$] ls -la /media

total 48
drwxr-xr-x  12 root root 4096 Jun  7 11:34 .
drwxr-xr-x  25 root root 4096 Jun  6 21:51 ..
lrwxrwxrwx   1 root root    6 Jul 25  2013 cdrom -> cdrom0
drwxr-xr-x   2 root root 4096 Jul 25  2013 cdrom0
drwxr-x---+  3 root root 4096 Jun  6 11:15 shirish
lrwxrwxrwx   1 root root    4 Jun  7 11:34 usb -> usb0
drwxr-xr-x   2 root root 4096 Jun  7 11:34 usb0
drwxr-xr-x   2 root root 4096 Jun  7 11:34 usb1
drwxr-xr-x   2 root root 4096 Jun  7 11:34 usb2
drwxr-xr-x   2 root root 4096 Jun  7 11:34 usb3
drwxr-xr-x   2 root root 4096 Jun  7 11:34 usb4
drwxr-xr-x   2 root root 4096 Jun  7 11:34 usb5
drwxr-xr-x   2 root root 4096 Jun  7 11:34 usb6
drwxr-xr-x   2 root root 4096 Jun  7 11:34 usb7

After insertion of the external hdd :-

[$] ls -la /media

ls: cannot access /media/usb0: Transport endpoint is not connected
total 44
drwxr-xr-x  12 root root 4096 Jun  7 11:34 .
drwxr-xr-x  25 root root 4096 Jun  6 21:51 ..
lrwxrwxrwx   1 root root    6 Jul 25  2013 cdrom -> cdrom0
drwxr-xr-x   2 root root 4096 Jul 25  2013 cdrom0
drwxr-x---+  3 root root 4096 Jun  6 11:15 shirish
lrwxrwxrwx   1 root root    4 Jun  7 11:34 usb -> usb0
d??????????  ? ?    ?       ?            ? usb0
drwxr-xr-x   2 root root 4096 Jun  7 11:34 usb1
drwxr-xr-x   2 root root 4096 Jun  7 11:34 usb2
drwxr-xr-x   2 root root 4096 Jun  7 11:34 usb3
drwxr-xr-x   2 root root 4096 Jun  7 11:34 usb4
drwxr-xr-x   2 root root 4096 Jun  7 11:34 usb5
drwxr-xr-x   2 root root 4096 Jun  7 11:34 usb6
drwxr-xr-x   2 root root 4096 Jun  7 11:34 usb7

I did two changes in the usbmount.conf file.

[$] cat /etc/usbmount/usbmount.conf | grep fuseblk
FILESYSTEMS="vfat ext2 ext3 ext4 hfsplus ntfs fuseblk"

probably ntfs wasn't necessary but don't know hence keeping it there
till somebody tells me otherwise.

[$] cat /etc/usbmount/usbmount.conf | grep VERBOSE
VERBOSE=yes

I do  not understand if the following error is because of usbmount or
some other package.

[$] usbhid-dump

libusb: error [_get_usbfs_fd] libusb couldn't open USB device
/dev/bus/usb/005/007: Permission denied
libusb: error [_get_usbfs_fd] libusb requires write access to USB device nodes.
Failed to find and open the devices: Access denied (insufficient
permissions) (ERROR_ACCESS)

I did read the last message as well, what does that mean ? I have both
usbdisk2 as well as usbmount.

Would removing/purging usbmount bring back the how external  hdd
automount or does it go deeper ?

Also I have both usbmount as well as udisks2 installed. Could that be
an issue? usbmount can easily be purged , usbdisks2 takes another few
softwares with it


Look forward to knowing what is best to do in the current situation
till the above issue is resolved to everyone's interests .

I did a post of the same at
http://forums.debian.net/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=122679 and a user kiyop
did share a workaround I knew but was not remembering the switches for
it (basically manually mounting it as root).

It does have the disadvantage that it doesn't show up in nautilus
unless you open nautilus as root ( know it's a bad bad idea) so have
to severe connection to the net when doing that way.

-- 
          Regards,
          Shirish Agarwal  शिरीष अग्रवाल
  My quotes in this email licensed under CC 3.0
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/
http://flossexperiences.wordpress.com
EB80 462B 08E1 A0DE A73A  2C2F 9F3D C7A4 E1C4 D2D8

Message #64 received at 774149@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Rogério Brito <rbrito@ime.usp.br>

To: shirish शिरीष <shirishag75@gmail.com>, 774149@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#774149: Is there a workaround for the Can't mount ntfs drive (Transport endpoint is not connected)

Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2015 00:41:10 -0300

Hi.

On Jun 07 2015, shirish शिरीष wrote:
> I just got hit by few days back, got time and was able to track it down :-
> I did read the last message as well, what does that mean ? I have both
> usbdisk2 as well as usbmount.

I guess that you meant udisks2, right? If that's your situation, I guess
that you can safely remove usbmount and use only udisks2.

In fact, I don't think that usbmount is useful anymore with udisks2 and
other things. Especially if you are using a desktop environment.


Hope this helps,

-- 
Rogério Brito : rbrito@{ime.usp.br,gmail.com} : GPG key 4096R/BCFCAAAA
http://cynic.cc/blog/ : github.com/rbrito : profiles.google.com/rbrito
DebianQA: http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=rbrito%40ime.usp.br

Message #69 received at 774149@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: shirish शिरीष <shirishag75@gmail.com>

To: Rogério Brito <rbrito@ime.usp.br>

Cc: 774149@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#774149: Is there a workaround for the Can't mount ntfs drive (Transport endpoint is not connected)

Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2015 07:41:45 +0530

In-line :-

On 6/8/15, Rogério Brito <rbrito@ime.usp.br> wrote:
> Hi.

Hi Rogério,

<snipped>

> I guess that you meant udisks2, right? If that's your situation, I guess
> that you can safely remove usbmount and use only udisks2.
>
> In fact, I don't think that usbmount is useful anymore with udisks2 and
> other things. Especially if you are using a desktop environment.

I meant udisks2 as well as pmount, although do not know if both
provide the same service or not.

I did remove usbmount and I'm on a desktop environment.  Could you
advise if udisks2 is good by itself or do I need to also use pmount. I
am on a desktop in a desktop environment (mate) :) .

My use-case is I want the usb thumb-drives/ external disks to mount
automatically.

> Hope this helps,
>
> --
> Rogério Brito : rbrito@{ime.usp.br,gmail.com} : GPG key 4096R/BCFCAAAA
> http://cynic.cc/blog/ : github.com/rbrito : profiles.google.com/rbrito
> DebianQA: http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=rbrito%40ime.usp.br

-- 
          Regards,
          Shirish Agarwal  शिरीष अग्रवाल
  My quotes in this email licensed under CC 3.0
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/
http://flossexperiences.wordpress.com
EB80 462B 08E1 A0DE A73A  2C2F 9F3D C7A4 E1C4 D2D8

Message #74 received at 774149@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Rogério Brito <rbrito@ime.usp.br>

To: shirish शिरीष <shirishag75@gmail.com>, 774149@bugs.debian.org

Cc: 774149-submitter@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#774149: Is there a workaround for the Can't mount ntfs drive (Transport endpoint is not connected)

Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2015 09:39:14 -0300

Hi, Shirish.

On Jun 09 2015, shirish शिरीष wrote:
> On 6/8/15, Rogério Brito <rbrito@ime.usp.br> wrote:
> > In fact, I don't think that usbmount is useful anymore with udisks2 and
> > other things. Especially if you are using a desktop environment.
> 
> I meant udisks2 as well as pmount, although do not know if both
> provide the same service or not.

Yes, it does.

> I did remove usbmount and I'm on a desktop environment.  Could you
> advise if udisks2 is good by itself or do I need to also use pmount. I
> am on a desktop in a desktop environment (mate) :) .

I also use mate on my systems. You don't need usbmount nor pmount on a
system that has udisks/udisks2.

The original intention with usbmount was to use in headless computers (like
a NAS, a small server, or something like that, where you want as few
dependencies as possible).

I think that that role is, nowadays, fulfilled by udisks2 and usbmount
should, perhaps, die. (Or other people adopt it).

> My use-case is I want the usb thumb-drives/ external disks to mount
> automatically.

That should happen without problems (provided that usbmount doesn't leave
any udev rule files that conflict with udisks2).


Hope this helps,


-- 
Rogério Brito : rbrito@{ime.usp.br,gmail.com} : GPG key 4096R/BCFCAAAA
http://cynic.cc/blog/ : github.com/rbrito : profiles.google.com/rbrito
DebianQA: http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=rbrito%40ime.usp.br

Message #82 received at 774149@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Rob Gom <rgom.debian@gmail.com>

To: 774149@bugs.debian.org

Subject: same here

Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2015 22:04:54 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi all,
is udisks2 really an alternative to usbmount?
I have it installed on testing, but it doesn't automatically mount anything:
carramba@robert-desktop:/usr/share/doc/udisks2$ dmesg | tail
[ 5092.063897] sd 4:0:0:0: [sdc] 30751744 512-byte logical blocks: (15.7
GB/14.6 GiB)
[ 5092.065393] sd 4:0:0:0: [sdc] Write Protect is off
[ 5092.065398] sd 4:0:0:0: [sdc] Mode Sense: 43 00 00 00
[ 5092.066387] sd 4:0:0:0: [sdc] Write cache: disabled, read cache:
enabled, doesn't support DPO or FUA
[ 5092.076058]  sdc: sdc1
[ 5092.079731] sd 4:0:0:0: [sdc] Attached SCSI removable disk


Yet it sees the pendrive:
carramba@robert-desktop:/usr/share/doc/udisks2$ udisksctl status sdc
MODEL                     REVISION  SERIAL               DEVICE
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crucial_CT120M500SSD1     MU05      14210C26DBA6         sda
ST500DM002-1BD142         KC48      Z6EFXKST             sdb
ATAPI   iHAS124   C       LL06      3524417_2J8152503510 sr0
SanDisk Cruzer Switch     1.27      20060164811DEF6391B3 sdc

I've tried to search web extensively, the only useful info was in arch wiki
(excellent btw.) about udisks wrappers (
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Udisks) but the packages mentioned
aren't in Debian.

I couldn't find any other useful info how to enable such automounting w/o
usbmount on Debian.

Regards,
Robert

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Message #87 received at 774149@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Jürgen Braun <j1braun@gmx.net>

To: 774149@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Workaround using at

Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 20:55:41 +0200

Hello,

I've got the same problem here on my system. I did a little research and
it seems, that udev is killing the mount.ntfs process after a few seconds.

I've created a litte nasty workaround using at. I think it would be a
much better way to tell udev to not kill the mount process, but I have
no clue about udev.


--- usbmount.orig       2015-06-24 20:48:29.027693081 +0200
+++ usbmount    2015-06-24 20:40:57.137418335 +0200
@@ -136,7 +136,8 @@

                # Mount the filesystem.
                log info "executing command: mount -t$fstype
${options:+-o$options} $DEVNAME $mountpoint"
-               mount "-t$fstype" "${options:+-o$options}" "$DEVNAME"
"$mountpoint"
+               echo mount "-t$fstype" "${options:+-o$options}"
"$DEVNAME" "$mountpoint" >/usr/share/usbmount/helper.sh
+                at -f /usr/share/usbmount/helper.sh now

                # Determine vendor and model.
                vendor=


best regards,
Jürgen

Message #92 received at 774149@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: jean-marc montanier <montanier.jeanmarc@gmail.com>

To: 774149@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Workaround working

Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2015 18:08:54 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi,

Just a quick message to report that the nasty workaround is anyway
efficient. It's working on my Jessie, thanks.

If udisks2 is covering the functionalities of usbmount and has an active
development, may be the usbmount package should be removed from the future
versions of debian ?

Jean-Marc

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Message #97 received at 774149@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: shirish शिरीष <shirishag75@gmail.com>

To: jean-marc montanier <montanier.jeanmarc@gmail.com>, 774149@bugs.debian.org

Subject: mounting and unmounting manually.

Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2015 22:04:17 +0530

addition at bottom :-

On 7/8/15, jean-marc montanier <montanier.jeanmarc@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Just a quick message to report that the nasty workaround is anyway
> efficient. It's working on my Jessie, thanks.
>
> If udisks2 is covering the functionalities of usbmount and has an active
> development, may be the usbmount package should be removed from the future
> versions of debian ?
>
> Jean-Marc

Hi all,
What I ended up doing was getting both usbmount and pmount purged from
the system and just use udisks2.

This is the way I use it :-

Before usb disk insertion :-

[$] lsblk
NAME   MAJ:MIN RM   SIZE RO TYPE MOUNTPOINT
sda      8:0    0 931.5G  0 disk
├─sda1   8:1    0  48.8G  0 part
├─sda2   8:2    0     1K  0 part
├─sda5   8:5    0  48.8G  0 part
├─sda6   8:6    0 186.3G  0 part /
├─sda7   8:7    0  93.1G  0 part /home
├─sda8   8:8    0 549.5G  0 part /data
└─sda9   8:9    0     5G  0 part [SWAP]
sr0     11:0    1  1024M  0 rom

After insertion :-

[$] lsblk
NAME   MAJ:MIN RM   SIZE RO TYPE MOUNTPOINT
sda      8:0    0 931.5G  0 disk
├─sda1   8:1    0  48.8G  0 part
├─sda2   8:2    0     1K  0 part
├─sda5   8:5    0  48.8G  0 part
├─sda6   8:6    0 186.3G  0 part /
├─sda7   8:7    0  93.1G  0 part /home
├─sda8   8:8    0 549.5G  0 part /data
└─sda9   8:9    0     5G  0 part [SWAP]
sdb      8:16   1   3.8G  0 disk
└─sdb1   8:17   1   3.8G  0 part
sr0     11:0    1  1024M  0 rom

[$] mount | grep /dev/sd

/dev/sda6 on / type ext4 (rw,relatime,errors=remount-ro,data=ordered)
/dev/sda8 on /data type ext4 (rw,relatime,data=ordered)
/dev/sda7 on /home type ext4 (rw,relatime,data=ordered)

[$] udisksctl mount -b /dev/sdb1

Mounted /dev/sdb1 at /media/shirish/shirish.

[$] mount | grep /dev/sd

/dev/sda6 on / type ext4 (rw,relatime,errors=remount-ro,data=ordered)
/dev/sda8 on /data type ext4 (rw,relatime,data=ordered)
/dev/sda7 on /home type ext4 (rw,relatime,data=ordered)
/dev/sdb1 on /media/shirish/shirish type vfat
(rw,nosuid,nodev,relatime,uid=1000,gid=1000,fmask=0022,dmask=0022,codepage=437,iocharset=utf8,shortname=mixed,showexec,utf8,flush,errors=remount-ro,uhelper=udisks2)

And unmounting :-

[$] udisksctl unmount -b /dev/sdb1

Unmounted /dev/sdb1.

[$] mount | grep /dev/sd

/dev/sda6 on / type ext4 (rw,relatime,errors=remount-ro,data=ordered)
/dev/sda8 on /data type ext4 (rw,relatime,data=ordered)
/dev/sda7 on /home type ext4 (rw,relatime,data=ordered)

because auto-mounting doesn't work :( .

For the above to work user has to be part of plugdev group.

-- 
          Regards,
          Shirish Agarwal  शिरीष अग्रवाल
  My quotes in this email licensed under CC 3.0
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/
http://flossexperiences.wordpress.com
EB80 462B 08E1 A0DE A73A  2C2F 9F3D C7A4 E1C4 D2D8

Message #102 received at 774149@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Jürgen Braun <j1braun@gmx.net>

To: 774149@bugs.debian.org

Subject: udisks2

Date: Wed, 08 Jul 2015 23:10:08 +0200

Hello,

Thanks for the reply.

I don't think you can cover all functionality with udisks2. I got the
same problem as shirish.
I was thinking about a udev rule to issue the udisksctrl command, but I
need to know the filesystem type before the mount to be able to specify
different mount options on vfat than on ntfs or ext2. This leads to a
more complex script which will basically look like usbmount, I think.

Besides, I do not like the way udisks2 is creating the mountpoints. I'd
like my flash drive on /media/usb0 and not some unpredictable
/media/<username>/<unpredictable_strange_flash_drive_name>


best regards,
Jürgen

Message #107 received at 774149@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Rogério Brito <rbrito@ime.usp.br>

To: jean-marc montanier <montanier.jeanmarc@gmail.com>, 774149@bugs.debian.org, 774149-submitter@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#774149: Workaround working

Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 17:38:46 -0300

Hi.

On Jul 08 2015, jean-marc montanier wrote:
> Just a quick message to report that the nasty workaround is anyway
> efficient. It's working on my Jessie, thanks.

The basic idea behind using at is not that bad at all.

I have investigated (a very tiny bit) of the behavior of fuse mounts and the
thing is that the fuse filesystems stay with their respective fuse programs
running until the filesystems are unmounted, which, apparently, leads udev
to think that they are stuck (which is not necessarily the case).

With the current workaround with at, we "offload" the task of a long running
process to at and udev then sees the whole procedure being "completed" in a
short time, and does not complain or kill the subprocess.

What I believe is a clener solution is that, instead of using at, we can
simply use a program that "daemonizes" the processes that we want. Perhaps a
very thin wrapper written in C around the daemon(2) function would be
sufficient for our needs.

Or, perhaps, we can stick with at, since it is a proven tool that stood the
test of the time (and the usbmount package would still continue to be arch:
all).

> If udisks2 is covering the functionalities of usbmount and has an active
> development, may be the usbmount package should be removed from the future
> versions of debian ?

I *think* that udisks2 *may* cover the functionalities of usbmount, but I
had a very bad time telling udisks2 that I want my NTFS filesystems mounted
with the options that I want (in particular, noatime, nodiratime, and
big_writes), but, apparently from what I read on blogs and other sites,
those *seem* to be hardcoded behavior, which is very unpleasant.

Nevertheless, I am thinking of moving the development of usbmount to my
github account and accepting all the pull requests there.

It is much easier (read: I can react much more quickly) to me to accept pull
requests there than receiving patches via e-mail and applying them (of
course, I will still be willing to receive patches by e-mail, but that's not
my preferred option).

I will keep the git repository in Debian mirrored with the github repo, so
that if github goes away (which I sincerely doubt), then we don't lose much.

How does that sound?

BTW, one very important question: are the problems with usbmount only
apparent when using fuse filesystems or are they also apparent when using
filesystems supported by the kernel (e.g., vfat or ext4)?


Regards,

-- 
Rogério Brito : rbrito@{ime.usp.br,gmail.com} : GPG key 4096R/BCFCAAAA
http://cynic.cc/blog/ : github.com/rbrito : profiles.google.com/rbrito
DebianQA: http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=rbrito%40ime.usp.br

Message #115 received at 774149@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Rogério Brito <rbrito@ime.usp.br>

To: shirish शिरीष <shirishag75@gmail.com>

Cc: jean-marc montanier <montanier.jeanmarc@gmail.com>, 774149@bugs.debian.org, 774149-submitter@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#774149: mounting and unmounting manually.

Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 17:48:32 -0300

Hi.

On Jul 08 2015, shirish शिरीष wrote:
> On 7/8/15, jean-marc montanier <montanier.jeanmarc@gmail.com> wrote:
> > If udisks2 is covering the functionalities of usbmount and has an active
> > development, may be the usbmount package should be removed from the future
> > versions of debian ?
>
> What I ended up doing was getting both usbmount and pmount purged from
> the system and just use udisks2.

OK.

(...)
> [$] mount | grep /dev/sd
> 
> /dev/sda6 on / type ext4 (rw,relatime,errors=remount-ro,data=ordered)
> /dev/sda8 on /data type ext4 (rw,relatime,data=ordered)
> /dev/sda7 on /home type ext4 (rw,relatime,data=ordered)
> /dev/sdb1 on /media/shirish/shirish type vfat
> (rw,nosuid,nodev,relatime,uid=1000,gid=1000,fmask=0022,dmask=0022,codepage=437,iocharset=utf8,shortname=mixed,showexec,utf8,flush,errors=remount-ro,uhelper=udisks2)

So, this means that you are/were also having problems with kernel-provided
filesystems like vfat? I thought that the problem only manifested when using
fuse filesystems.

I also don't like the flush option that is passed compulsorily to the
filesystems by udisks2, especially for USB thumb/flash/pen drives. And I
don't like the relatime option also on my systems.

(...)
> because auto-mounting doesn't work :( .

I'm still undecided about the future of usbmount (see my previous message
about moving things to github). If I were to kill usbmount, then I guess
that we should have a good documentation of how to migrate.

And, perhaps, some work on the udisks2 side of things would be needed to
support our use case, but good luck convincing the developers of udisks2 to
change their mind to behave like we want to (I believe that they would
resist to changes, but one can try, at least).

> For the above to work user has to be part of plugdev group.

Yes. With pmount, you wouldn't need to.


Regards,

-- 
Rogério Brito : rbrito@{ime.usp.br,gmail.com} : GPG key 4096R/BCFCAAAA
http://cynic.cc/blog/ : github.com/rbrito : profiles.google.com/rbrito
DebianQA: http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=rbrito%40ime.usp.br

Message #123 received at 774149@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Rogério Brito <rbrito@ime.usp.br>

To: Jürgen Braun <j1braun@gmx.net>

Cc: 774149@bugs.debian.org, shirish शिरीष <shirishag75@gmail.com>, jean-marc montanier <montanier.jeanmarc@gmail.com>

Subject: Re: Bug#774149: udisks2

Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 17:53:20 -0300

Hi.

On Jul 08 2015, Jürgen Braun wrote:
> I don't think you can cover all functionality with udisks2. I got the
> same problem as shirish.

Yes, you guys convinced me that usbmount still has its uses.

> I was thinking about a udev rule to issue the udisksctrl command, but I
> need to know the filesystem type before the mount to be able to specify
> different mount options on vfat than on ntfs or ext2. This leads to a
> more complex script which will basically look like usbmount, I think.

I think that yes. Not really sure, but I guess that you are correct.

> Besides, I do not like the way udisks2 is creating the mountpoints. I'd
> like my flash drive on /media/usb0 and not some unpredictable
> /media/<username>/<unpredictable_strange_flash_drive_name>

Yes, this was one of the selling points of usbmount, since I wanted
something simple for my systems that *don't* have a full-blown desktop
environment installed (e.g., one NAS with 128MB and another with only 64MB
of memory).


Thanks for the feedback,

-- 
Rogério Brito : rbrito@{ime.usp.br,gmail.com} : GPG key 4096R/BCFCAAAA
http://cynic.cc/blog/ : github.com/rbrito : profiles.google.com/rbrito
DebianQA: http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=rbrito%40ime.usp.br

Message #128 received at 774149@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Mathieu Malaterre <malat@debian.org>

To: Rogério Brito <rbrito@ime.usp.br>, 774149-quiet@bugs.debian.org

Cc: jean-marc montanier <montanier.jeanmarc@gmail.com>, 774149 <774149@bugs.debian.org>, 774149-submitter@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#774149: Workaround working

Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2015 09:19:25 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 10:38 PM, Rogério Brito <rbrito@ime.usp.br> wrote:

> BTW, one very important question: are the problems with usbmount only
> apparent when using fuse filesystems or are they also apparent when using
> filesystems supported by the kernel (e.g., vfat or ext4)?
>
>
vfat & ext4 usbkey were ok for me. So I suspect this is only FUSE-related.

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Message #141 received at 774149@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Rogério Brito <rbrito@ime.usp.br>

To: Mathieu Malaterre <malat@debian.org>

Cc: jean-marc montanier <montanier.jeanmarc@gmail.com>, 774149@bugs.debian.org, 774149-submitter@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#774149: Workaround working

Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2015 19:13:08 -0300

Hi, Mathieu.

On Jul 16 2015, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 10:38 PM, Rogério Brito <rbrito@ime.usp.br> wrote:
> > BTW, one very important question: are the problems with usbmount only
> > apparent when using fuse filesystems or are they also apparent when using
> > filesystems supported by the kernel (e.g., vfat or ext4)?
>
> vfat & ext4 usbkey were ok for me. So I suspect this is only FUSE-related.

Ah, thanks for the confirmation of my suspicion.

I just got a few external HDs that came preformatted in NTFS and I would
like to keep them as NTFS for the sake of:

* Storing files larger than 4GB (namely, videos that I grab from youtube via
  my package youtube-dl or tarballs of backups).
* Compatibility with other systems, in the (hopefully, rare) event that shit
  happens and I have to restore things from them.

Unfortunately, mounting NTFS filesystems with ntfs-3g with the default
options that udisks2 provides by default (and this applies to every modern
Linux system nowadays running any desktop environment) are a nightmare.

In particular, the lack of the option `big_writes` makes even modern amd64
CPUs burn so many cycles, while putting the option `big_writes` alleviates a
*lot* the CPU load and things get, from my own tests, about a 3 fold
speedup.  That's the difference between a file transfer taking 1 hour
vs. it taking 3 hours.

This is one of the positive sides of usbmount in relation to udisks/udisks2,
which I think that may justify usbmount still be maintained.

What do you guys think of this?  If I continue developing usbmount, I will
move it to github (as I previously mentioned), since that way the code gets
a lot more visibility and I like the workflow much more than via patchbombs
being sent to my e-mail address. :)

I would also be willing to give commit access to anybody that shows good
contributions to the repository.


Thanks for the feedback,

-- 
Rogério Brito : rbrito@{ime.usp.br,gmail.com} : GPG key 4096R/BCFCAAAA
http://cynic.cc/blog/ : github.com/rbrito : profiles.google.com/rbrito
DebianQA: http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=rbrito%40ime.usp.br

Message #149 received at 774149@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: shirish शिरीष <shirishag75@gmail.com>

To: Rogério Brito <rbrito@ime.usp.br>, 774149-quiet@bugs.debian.org

Cc: Mathieu Malaterre <malat@debian.org>, jean-marc montanier <montanier.jeanmarc@gmail.com>, 774149@bugs.debian.org, 774149-submitter@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#774149: Workaround working

Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2015 01:27:34 +0000

Dear Rogério,
I would simply say go ahead with your plan. If you are able to resolve
the issues with a new release, then nothing like it. I am already
subscribed to the package in case a new one comes out :)

Although at my end, it is also ntfs which shows the same problem as
external usb-hdd.

Till later.
-- 
          Regards,
          Shirish Agarwal  शिरीष अग्रवाल
  My quotes in this email licensed under CC 3.0
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/
http://flossexperiences.wordpress.com
EB80 462B 08E1 A0DE A73A  2C2F 9F3D C7A4 E1C4 D2D8

Message #162 received at 774149@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Jürgen Braun <j1braun@gmx.net>

To: 774149@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#774149: Workaround working

Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2015 20:36:54 +0200

Hi Rogério


I would really appreciate if you keep usbmount alive.

The idea of a small tool to daemonize mount sounds interesting, but this
is one point where I am not sure. I've read an article about udev, where
it was stated, that udev should not start a daemon directly, but should
use systemd to do it.
Adding a dependency to systemd gives the project a complexity and
political level I don't like. This was the point where I started on
thinking about using at to do the job.

To complete your question: This "bug" only affects fuse based
filesystems on my side.


best regards,
Jürgen

Message #167 received at 774149@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Mathieu Malaterre <malat@debian.org>

To: 774149 <774149@bugs.debian.org>

Subject: Re: Bug#774149: udisks2

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2015 19:44:27 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 10:53 PM, Rogério Brito <rbrito@ime.usp.br> wrote:
>
> > Besides, I do not like the way udisks2 is creating the mountpoints. I'd
> > like my flash drive on /media/usb0 and not some unpredictable
> > /media/<username>/<unpredictable_strange_flash_drive_name>
>
> Yes, this was one of the selling points of usbmount, since I wanted
> something simple for my systems that *don't* have a full-blown desktop
> environment installed (e.g., one NAS with 128MB and another with only 64MB
> of memory).
>

I also discover that lots of stuff are hard-coded in udisk2. See for
example: windows_names for fuse/ntfs-3g system. Ref:

http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/217599/setting-default-udisk2-ntfs-option-for-removable-drive

I may have to give up on udisk2 afterall :(

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Message #172 received at 774149@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Rogério Brito <rbrito@ime.usp.br>

To: malat@debian.org

Cc: j1braun@gmx.net, 774149@bugs.debian.org, shirishag75@gmail.com, montanier.jeanmarc@gmail.com

Subject: Re: Bug#774149: udisks2

Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 03:36:09 -0300

Hi there, you all.

On Jul 29 2015, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 10:53 PM, Rogério Brito <rbrito@ime.usp.br> wrote:
> > Yes, this was one of the selling points of usbmount, since I wanted
> > something simple for my systems that *don't* have a full-blown desktop
> > environment installed (e.g., one NAS with 128MB and another with only 64MB
> > of memory).
> 
> I also discover that lots of stuff are hard-coded in udisk2. See for
> example: windows_names for fuse/ntfs-3g system. Ref:
> 
> http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/217599/setting-default-udisk2-ntfs-option-for-removable-drive

I have not yet had the opportunity to read the post above, but I *did* read
the code for udisks2 and I saw that it has a whitelist of filesystems and/or
options that may be passed to the program.

As you discovered, they are hardcoded---IMVHO, it would be much better to
have them be read from a file under /etc, since the administrator probably
knows better which options they need for their own devices.

That's the unfortunate situation of enforcing "sane" (ahem) policy from the
new desktops and people that work with them.

On a related note, I put the source code of usbmount on the following
repository:  https://github.com/rbrito/usbmount

Anybody is welcome to send me patches there (and if I have not replied,
please create an issue there, so that I may have not forgotten about your
issue) and I will gladly:

* Review your patch, hopefully, with help from the community of users.
* Keep the credits for each and every contribution (this is important for
  some people, as potential employers and/or funding agencies want to know
  how a given person spends their time).

Of course, if you don't want your contribution to be credited, that's
perfectly fine with me too.

*Any* kind of contribution is welcome, especially to the documentation,
since it was quite a long time ago that I last updated the package and many
pieces of outdated information are likely to be there.


Thanks,

Rogério Brito.

-- 
Rogério Brito : rbrito@{ime.usp.br,gmail.com} : GPG key 4096R/BCFCAAAA
http://cynic.cc/blog/ : github.com/rbrito : profiles.google.com/rbrito
DebianQA: http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=rbrito%40ime.usp.br

Message #177 received at 774149@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Christian Weinberger <christian.weinberger@t-online.de>

To: 774149@bugs.debian.org <774149@bugs.debian.org>

Subject: Alternative Solution for Jessie

Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 22:56:28 +0200

After some more research, I found an alternative solution for this issue in Jessie

Pros:
- no changes to usbmount code necessary, no upstream dependency
- can easily be added as a fix on existing usbmount installs
- works not only for NTFS mounts, but also for long running scripts hooked by usbmount (via mount.d & umount.d folders)
- should be easy to be integrated into the Debian package

Cons:
- requires systemd! Since to problem is caused by systemd logic only, this should not be a big issue. If the maintainer would integrate the solution into the package, this needs different install time handling for systemd is NOT installed on the system.

The solution is based on the following two additional files:


/etc/udev/rules.d/usbmount.rules
# Rules for USBmount -*- conf -*-
KERNEL=="sd*", DRIVERS=="sbp2",         ACTION=="add",  PROGRAM="/bin/systemd-escape -p --template=usbmount@.service $env{DEVNAME}", ENV{SYSTEMD_WANTS}+="%c"
KERNEL=="sd*", SUBSYSTEMS=="usb",       ACTION=="add",  PROGRAM="/bin/systemd-escape -p --template=usbmount@.service $env{DEVNAME}", ENV{SYSTEMD_WANTS}+="%c"
KERNEL=="ub*", SUBSYSTEMS=="usb",       ACTION=="add",  PROGRAM="/bin/systemd-escape -p --template=usbmount@.service $env{DEVNAME}", ENV{SYSTEMD_WANTS}+="%c"
KERNEL=="sd*",                          ACTION=="remove",       RUN+="/usr/share/usbmount/usbmount remove"
KERNEL=="ub*",                          ACTION=="remove",       RUN+="/usr/share/usbmount/usbmount remove"


/etc/systemd/system/usbmount@.service
[Unit]
BindTo=%i.device
After=%i.device

[Service]
Type=oneshot
TimeoutStartSec=0
Environment=DEVNAME=%I
ExecStart=/usr/share/usbmount/usbmount add
RemainAfterExit=yes


How it works:
Starting usbmount via systemd-escape ensues, that a different cgroup than the one from the udev environment is used. Therefore, sub processes started from usbmount are not killed when udev terminates its cgroup.
The original udev rules file /lib/udev/rules.d/usbmount.rules from the package can remain unchanged, as /etc/udev/rules.d/usbmount.rules overrules it.

Valuable source of further information are
http://blog.fraggod.net/2015/01/12/starting-systemd-service-instance-for-device-from-udev.html
http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/28548/how-to-run-custom-scripts-upon-usb-device-plug-in/28711#28711

Message #182 received at 774149@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Mathieu Malaterre <malat@debian.org>

To: Christian Weinberger <christian.weinberger@t-online.de>, 774149 <774149@bugs.debian.org>

Subject: Re: Bug#774149: Alternative Solution for Jessie

Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2015 13:17:41 +0200

Control: tags -1 patch

On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 10:56 PM, Christian Weinberger
<christian.weinberger@t-online.de> wrote:
> After some more research, I found an alternative solution for this issue in Jessie

Nice ! I believe the code is now hosted on github. Could you please
write a pull request.

Message #189 received at 774149@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Mathieu Malaterre <malat@debian.org>

To: 774149 <774149@bugs.debian.org>

Subject: systemd

Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 12:59:54 +0200

Just FYI:

[How to automount optical media on Debian Linux for Kodi]

https://ddumont.wordpress.com/2015/09/27/how-to-automount-optical-media-on-debian-linux-for-kodi/

Message #194 received at 774149@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Faheem Mitha <faheem@faheem.info>

To: 774149@bugs.debian.org

Cc: Rob Gom <rgom.debian@gmail.com>, Mathieu Malaterre <malat@debian.org>, Rogério Brito <rbrito@ime.usp.br>, Jürgen Braun <j1braun@gmx.net>, jean-marc montanier <montanier.jeanmarc@gmail.com>, Christian Weinberger <christian.weinberger@t-online.de>, shirish शिरीष <shirishag75@gmail.com>

Subject: fixing the stable package

Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2015 22:11:31 +0530 (IST)

[CCs to suitable-seeming people. If you are getting this email via the 
BTS too, sorry about the noise, but the BTS really should say who is 
subscribed.]

Hi,

The patch by Christian Weinberger fixes the problem for me, though I don't 
really understand it.

It seems this bug breaks usbmount in stable, at least for me, and (it 
seems) others too. Is this a candidate for a stable fix? I'm willing to 
make a fix and do an upload if there is someone out there who will sponsor 
me. Or should I submit a pull request? And if so, where?

Oh, but first, could we get come concensus that the Christian patch is the 
correct way to go? It looks good to me, but I don't understand the context 
well enough to say.

                                                      Regard, Faheem Mitha

Message #199 received at 774149@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Jürgen Braun <j1braun@gmx.net>

To: Faheem Mitha <faheem@faheem.info>, 774149@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#774149: fixing the stable package

Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2015 20:33:10 +0100

Hi all,

the Patch from Christian works for me as well with one exception. I had
to remove the file /lib/udev/rules.d/usbmount.rules after creating
/etc/udev/rules.d/usbmount.rules. If I do not remove the original file,
usbmount is called twice which leads to a double mount of the usb flash
drive:

$mount|grep sdd1
/dev/sdd1 on /media/usb1 type ext2
(rw,nosuid,nodev,noatime,nodiratime,errors=continue,user_xattr,acl)
/dev/sdd1 on /media/usb2 type ext2
(rw,nosuid,nodev,noatime,nodiratime,errors=continue,user_xattr,acl)


I've successfully tested ext2, vfat and ntfs based usb flash drives so
far using this patch.

I guess this is the systemd way to get this done.
As far as I understood Christians patch, this adds a dependency to
systemd (since it is using systemd-escape). I am not sure if this is the
*best* way to do.

How to deal with systems using sysvinit or upstart?

best regards,
Jürgen



Am 04.12.2015 um 17:41 schrieb Faheem Mitha:
> 
> [CCs to suitable-seeming people. If you are getting this email via the
> BTS too, sorry about the noise, but the BTS really should say who is
> subscribed.]
> 
> Hi,
> 
> The patch by Christian Weinberger fixes the problem for me, though I
> don't really understand it.
> 
> It seems this bug breaks usbmount in stable, at least for me, and (it
> seems) others too. Is this a candidate for a stable fix? I'm willing to
> make a fix and do an upload if there is someone out there who will
> sponsor me. Or should I submit a pull request? And if so, where?
> 
> Oh, but first, could we get come concensus that the Christian patch is
> the correct way to go? It looks good to me, but I don't understand the
> context well enough to say.
> 
>                                                       Regard, Faheem Mitha
> 

Message #204 received at 774149@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Faheem Mitha <faheem@faheem.info>

To: Jürgen Braun <j1braun@gmx.net>

Cc: 774149@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#774149: fixing the stable package

Date: Sat, 5 Dec 2015 01:41:48 +0530 (IST)

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Fri, 4 Dec 2015, Jürgen Braun wrote:

> Hi all,

> the Patch from Christian works for me as well with one exception. I had 
> to remove the file /lib/udev/rules.d/usbmount.rules after creating 
> /etc/udev/rules.d/usbmount.rules. If I do not remove the original file, 
> usbmount is called twice which leads to a double mount of the usb flash 
> drive:

> $mount|grep sdd1
> /dev/sdd1 on /media/usb1 type ext2
> (rw,nosuid,nodev,noatime,nodiratime,errors=continue,user_xattr,acl)
> /dev/sdd1 on /media/usb2 type ext2
> (rw,nosuid,nodev,noatime,nodiratime,errors=continue,user_xattr,acl)

> I've successfully tested ext2, vfat and ntfs based usb flash drives so 
> far using this patch.

> I guess this is the systemd way to get this done. As far as I understood 
> Christians patch, this adds a dependency to systemd (since it is using 
> systemd-escape). I am not sure if this is the *best* way to do.

> How to deal with systems using sysvinit or upstart?

I forgot to say that I replaced the old usbmount.rules with the old ones. 
Having two didn't make sense to me.

So usbmount.rules went into /lib/udev/rules.d. Also, I put 
usbmount@.service in /lib/systemd/system.

This was what lintian seemed to think was correct. anyway. I didn't check 
any documentation about this.

I've no idea whether how or if this works for systems not using systemd.

                                                         Regards, Faheem

Message #209 received at 774149@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Mathieu Malaterre <malat@debian.org>

To: 774149 <774149@bugs.debian.org>

Cc: dod@debian.org

Subject: Automount usb devices with systemd

Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 08:35:37 +0200

For anyone reading this bug report, dod@d.o has posted a nice summary
on how to use systemd to automatically mount a USB key:

https://ddumont.wordpress.com/2016/04/24/automount-usb-devices-with-systemd/

Message #214 received at 774149@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Dima Kogan <dima@secretsauce.net>

To: 774149@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Cannot reproduce

Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2016 22:51:34 -0700

Can somebody help me reproduce this bug? I'm using systemd (debian/sid)
and am mounting an ntfs usb disk using ntfs-3g. It works fine and
reliably with usbmount. Why am I not seeing breakage?

Message #219 received at 774149@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Jürgen Braun <j1braun@gmx.net>

To: Dima Kogan <dima@secretsauce.net>, 774149@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#774149: Cannot reproduce

Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2016 21:56:54 +0200

Hi Dima,

I'm using Debian/Stable only, therefore I cannot test this on Debian/Sid.
My guess is, that there might be a change in ntfs-3g or systemd to fix this.

best regards,
Jürgen

Message #224 received at 774149@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Dima Kogan <dima@secretsauce.net>

To: Jürgen Braun <j1braun@gmx.net>

Cc: 774149@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#774149: Cannot reproduce

Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2016 22:21:37 -0700

Jürgen Braun <j1braun@gmx.net> writes:

> I'm using Debian/Stable only, therefore I cannot test this on Debian/Sid.
> My guess is, that there might be a change in ntfs-3g or systemd to fix this.

Hmmm. If that is the case, then this bug can be closed, or at least
reduced in severity, which would allow usbmount to remain in Debian. Can
anybody confirm that sid fixes the issue?

Message #229 received at 774149@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: "USPS Delivery" <daryl.pratt@neufoctobre.com>

To: 774149@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Notification status of your delivery (USPS 04369519)

Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2017 08:30:26 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Dear Customer,

Your parcel was successfully delivered January 03 to USPS Station, but our courier cound not contact you.

Please review delivery label in attachment!

Kind regards,
Daryl Pratt,
USPS Chief Operation Agent.

[Undelivered-Parcel-ID-04369519.zip (application/zip, attachment)]

Message #234 received at 774149@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: calmbeauty.com-w@baldr.fah-designs.co.uk

To: 774149@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Delivery Status Notification

Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2017 22:01:33 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Dear Customer,

Please review your parcel delivery label in the attachment!

FedEx

-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
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-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

[FedEx-Label-ID-6GWIVSPN.zip (application/zip, attachment)]

Message #239 received at 774149@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Barr Julian Marshall <baslealio.58@gmail.com>

To: undisclosed-recipients:;

Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2020 06:43:38 -0700

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Ich habe mich wegen der Dringlichkeit dieser Frage entschlossen, Sie zu
kontaktieren. Ich bin Julian Marshall, Rechtsanwalt. Ich persönlich bin ein
Treuhandagent von Dr. Edwin, einem weithin bekannten unabhängigen
Auftragnehmer hier in Lome Togo, der mit seiner Frau und seiner einzigen
Tochter bei einem Autounfall starb. Ich habe Sie kontaktiert, um mich bei
der Rückführung von zwei Millionen fünfhunderttausend Dollar auf Ihr Konto
zu unterstützen. Bitte kontaktieren Sie mich für weitere Informationen zu
diesem Thema.

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Message #244 received at 774149@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: "Adv. Hermann Djogbe" <advhermannd@gmail.com>

To: undisclosed-recipients:;

Subject: Hallo

Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 19:16:06 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

[image: image.png]

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

[image.png (image/png, inline)]

Message #249 received at 774149-done@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Debian FTP Masters <ftpmaster@ftp-master.debian.org>

To: 321694-done@bugs.debian.org,326081-done@bugs.debian.org,356227-done@bugs.debian.org,361693-done@bugs.debian.org,377548-done@bugs.debian.org,502352-done@bugs.debian.org,508699-done@bugs.debian.org,510007-done@bugs.debian.org,544806-done@bugs.debian.org,544900-done@bugs.debian.org,568246-done@bugs.debian.org,574922-done@bugs.debian.org,576305-done@bugs.debian.org,586972-done@bugs.debian.org,587067-done@bugs.debian.org,588874-done@bugs.debian.org,592150-done@bugs.debian.org,592367-done@bugs.debian.org,600546-done@bugs.debian.org,627632-done@bugs.debian.org,648557-done@bugs.debian.org,658028-done@bugs.debian.org,658318-done@bugs.debian.org,670728-done@bugs.debian.org,676554-done@bugs.debian.org,740142-done@bugs.debian.org,743912-done@bugs.debian.org,761431-done@bugs.debian.org,774149-done@bugs.debian.org,775729-done@bugs.debian.org,780510-done@bugs.debian.org,821943-done@bugs.debian.org,824447-done@bugs.debian.org,994656-done@bugs.debian.org,

Cc: usbmount@packages.debian.org

Subject: Bug#1002945: Removed package(s) from unstable

Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2022 00:24:35 +0000

Version: 0.0.22+rm

Dear submitter,

as the package usbmount has just been removed from the Debian archive
unstable we hereby close the associated bug reports.  We are sorry
that we couldn't deal with your issue properly.

For details on the removal, please see https://bugs.debian.org/1002945

The version of this package that was in Debian prior to this removal
can still be found using http://snapshot.debian.org/.

Please note that the changes have been done on the master archive and
will not propagate to any mirrors until the next dinstall run at the
earliest.

This message was generated automatically; if you believe that there is
a problem with it please contact the archive administrators by mailing
ftpmaster@ftp-master.debian.org.

Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Scott Kitterman (the ftpmaster behind the curtain)

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.