Linux

49276 readers

1412 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
No misinformation
No NSFW content
No hate speech, bigotry, etc

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Can you recursively chown all files in the folder linked by a symbolic link? (self.linux)

submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by Kalcifer to c/[email protected]

2 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Solution

As mentioned by @[email protected], the solution was to add the flag -H to the chown command. For example, to change the ownership recursively down the file linked by a symbolic link, you would do somehting like

$ chown -HR <symbolic-link>

For reference, see the section on -H:

-H if a command line argument is a symbolic link to a directory, traverse it

Edit 1:

Another useful flag is -L:

-L traverse every symbolic link to a directory encountered

Original Post

On a server I have some folder, x, that contains many files. x has a symbolic link y. y is shared over the network via Samba. Some client creates some files with within the shared y folder (the files are then owned as client:client since I don't have a forced user configured in samba). I tried to change the ownership of all of those files on the server by doing # chown -R new_user:new_group y, however the ownership of all the files within x stayed the same. I could only change their ownership if I did not chown across the symbolic link.

I thought chown could follow symbolic links?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Kalcifer 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Ah, dang, yeah that would do it. Thank you!

It appears I have misread the stack exchange posts I was looking at. I thought I read that they said that chown, by default, traverses the symbolic link, but, in actuality, what they were saying was that it, by default, changes the ownership of the target file of the symbolic link.