folders read only

[jwalk]

I have folders, esp. in Favorites, that are read only.
When I try to reset with properties - apply - OK, it does not work.
Some postings say folders do not do this, but it is preventing renaming.
I have a single-use system, so it is not a permissions issue.

 

[Pegasus]

I have folders, esp. in Favorites, that are read only.
When I try to reset with properties - apply - OK, it does not work.
Some postings say folders do not do this, but it is preventing renaming.
I have a single-use system, so it is not a permissions issue.

Windows ignores the read-only attribute of folders. If you cannot rename a
folder then it is because some file in the folder is open. Reboot the
machine in Safe Mode, then try again.

 

[Twayne]

I have folders, esp. in Favorites, that are read only.
When I try to reset with properties - apply - OK, it does not work.
Some postings say folders do not do this, but it is preventing
renaming. I have a single-use system, so it is not a permissions
issue.

Well, if you're getting responses that folders are NOT always marked
read only and that the readonly bit on a folder keeps it from being
deleted, you should do 2 things, especially since you can't seem to
decide who to believe:

1. Research it for yourself, becuse the readonly you see on folders
does NOT mean the folders themselves are readonly. It's nasty of
Microsoft to leave it that way, but ... any folder you create can be
deleted.

2. Realize it can still be a permissions issue. Windows may not allow
you to remove its folders. You cannot delete system folders. Even
though you are the only human user, you are no the ONLY user.

There ARE ways to mark regular folders as system folders and
vice-versa. Your research would uncover that.
IFF it's a normal folder that thinks it's a system folder or placed
there by malware, whatever, give us the version of windows XP you have,
the folder name and the contents of the folder, or some indication to
reasonably prove it's not a system folder.
Successful removal of a system folder can result in:
1. It just being recreated, or
2. system failure up to and including inability to boot or start up.

Unfortunately there's no way to convince you the posts are/are not
correct, if that's what you're looking for. Thus, it leaves it as a
case of research it yourself so you can decide on your own, or describe
it so the more knowledgeable can assist you.
NOTE: If you lurk for awhile, you'll get a good feeling for whose
posts are good and those who are not necessarily good.

Google found over a million hits so perhaps you want to try narrowing
down the search there for the answer.

HTH,

Twayne

 

[Tim Slattery]

I have folders, esp. in Favorites, that are read only.
When I try to reset with properties - apply - OK, it does not work.
Some postings say folders do not do this, but it is preventing renaming.
I have a single-use system, so it is not a permissions issue.

We just went through this. There is no read-only attribute for
folders. What you're seeing is a shortcut that allows you to set or
clear the read-only attribute for all the files in the folder and
optionally in sub-folders as well.

It's a three-state box that appears originally in its neutral state:
neither checked nor unchecked. Click it once, and it will become
unchecked. If you click "OK" or "Apply" now, all files within the
folder will have the bit cleared. Click the box again, and a check
appears. Now checking "OK" or "Apply" will make all the files in the
folder read-only. Click the box once more and it goes back to its
neutral state. Of course, every time you open the dialog the box
appears in the neutral state. Depending on your display settings, the
neutral state may be a filled box, which can fool you into thinking
it's checked.

 

[Pegasus]

We just went through this. There is no read-only attribute for
folders. What you're seeing is a shortcut that allows you to set or
clear the read-only attribute for all the files in the folder and
optionally in sub-folders as well.

Yes, we just went through this and I showed clearly that there is a
read-only attribute for folders. However, Windows ignores it.

 

[Tim Slattery]

Yes, we just went through this and I showed clearly that there is a
read-only attribute for folders. However, Windows ignores it.

The bit exists because the directory entry for a subdirectory is the
same as for a normal file. All have a set of attribute bits, which
include read-only, system, hidden, archive, and directory. An entry
for a subdirectory has its directory bit turned on. Once that happens,
the system ignores the RO bit, because it's meaningless.

 

[Pegasus [MVP]]

The bit exists because the directory entry for a subdirectory is the
same as for a normal file. All have a set of attribute bits, which
include read-only, system, hidden, archive, and directory. An entry
for a subdirectory has its directory bit turned on. Once that happens,
the system ignores the RO bit, because it's meaningless.

--
Tim Slattery
MS MVP(Shell/User)
(e-mail address removed)
http://members.cox.net/slatteryt

Agreed. To avoid further confusion you should probably refrain from making
statemens such as "There is no read-only attribute for
folders".

 

[John Wunderlich]

I have folders, esp. in Favorites, that are read only.
When I try to reset with properties - apply - OK, it does not
work. Some postings say folders do not do this, but it is
preventing renaming. I have a single-use system, so it is not a
permissions issue.

The explanation straight from Microsoft:

"You cannot view or change the Read-only or the System attributes of
folders in Windows Server 2003, in Windows XP, or in Windows Vista"

<http://support.microsoft.com/kb/326549>

HTH,
John

 

[Tim Slattery]

Agreed. To avoid further confusion you should probably refrain from making
statemens such as "There is no read-only attribute for
folders".

I won't because there isn't. The RO bit logically doesn't exist when
the directory bit is set.

 

[Bob I]

I won't because there isn't. The RO bit logically doesn't exist when
the directory bit is set.

Whoa, the RO bit is there, it just isn't set by default. If it is set,
Windows GUI will ignore it, but the Command Prompt will honor it and
give you access denied if you attempt to delete it.

 

[Pegasus [MVP]]

I won't because there isn't. The RO bit logically doesn't exist when
the directory bit is set.

Wouldn't it be more accurate to say "The RO bit is ignored when the
directory bit is set"? There is a good reason why I'm labouring the point:
Posters in this NG frequently ask why their folders have a read-only status.
When you tell them "There is no read-only attribute for folders" they wonder
if they are seeing things, since the RO attribute is clearly visible. Saying
that it gets ignored would settle the argument once and for all.

To draw an analogy: You may decide that your ex no longer exists when you're
in the room. Now to all purposes she may be invisible to you but making such
a statement would cause those around you to question your rational
processes. Your ex still exists and the RO directory bit still exists, even
though neither has any effect in your universe.

 

[Pegasus [MVP]]

Whoa, the RO bit is there, it just isn't set by default. If it is set,
Windows GUI will ignore it, but the Command Prompt will honor it and give
you access denied if you attempt to delete it.

The Explorer GUI will actually display it.

 

[Pegasus [MVP]]

The explanation straight from Microsoft:

"You cannot view or change the Read-only or the System attributes of
folders in Windows Server 2003, in Windows XP, or in Windows Vista"

<http://support.microsoft.com/kb/326549>

HTH,
John

You can view the RO/S attributes in Windows Explorer.
You can change either attributes with VB Scripts.
The article you refer to deals with attrib.exe, not with Explorer or with
scripts.

 

[Bob I]

The Explorer GUI will actually display it.

yes, I alluded to that earlier, so perhaps "won't honor it" would be a
better way of phrasing it.

 

[John Wunderlich]

You can view the RO/S attributes in Windows Explorer.
You can change either attributes with VB Scripts.
The article you refer to deals with attrib.exe, not with Explorer
or with scripts.

If you read beyond the "Summary" paragraph at the beginning, the
following paragraphs explain the purpose of the Read-only bit for
folders and why the Properties window won't change that bit and why
this bit is virtually ignored by Windows. It seems to me that this
addresses the complaints of the OP.

-- John

 

[Tim Slattery]

Wouldn't it be more accurate to say "The RO bit is ignored when the
directory bit is set"?

Which in my mind says that the bit is there, but the *attribute* is
not. It's all semantics, neither of us is going to change the other's
mind.

 

[Bob I]

Which in my mind says that the bit is there, but the *attribute* is
not. It's all semantics, neither of us is going to change the other's
mind.

Hey guys, all files and folders have the Read-only bit or attribute,
that bit may be SET or UNSET. The Windows GUI doesn't fully honor the
status the of the R-O bit being set on either files or folders. For
instance set Read-Only and then try Deleting the file or folder from the
CMD prompt. -------Access denied-------. Now try from the GUI, poof, all
gone, nary a quibble.

 

[Twayne]

The explanation straight from Microsoft:

"You cannot view or change the Read-only or the System attributes of
folders in Windows Server 2003, in Windows XP, or in Windows Vista"

<http://support.microsoft.com/kb/326549>

HTH,
John

That's a good find, John; thanks. Kind of puts it all straight finally.
I've seen posts that the bit was for something else, but never had
anything concrete to go along with it.

Cheers,

Twayne

 

[Lem]

That's a good find, John; thanks. Kind of puts it all straight finally.
I've seen posts that the bit was for something else, but never had
anything concrete to go along with it.

Cheers,

Twayne

At least with respect to XP, the "bit" -- or more accurately, the "Read
only" box in the Windows Explorer Properties GUI for folders -- actually
does have a use.

It has 3 states. Its initial state is "neutral" but this may appear to
be "filled in." If you click it once, the box clears; click a second
time and a check will appear in the box. After one or two clicks, as the
case may be, if you then click OK or Apply, you will get a dialog noting
that you are about to make an attribute change to set or unset read
only, and asking if you want to "Apply changes to this folder only" or
"Apply changes to this folder, subfolders and files".

AFACT, the first choice does nothing. If you select "Apply changes to
this folder, subfolders and files" all files that are contained in "this
folder" and any subfolders will have their read-only attribute set or unset.

--
Lem -- MS-MVP

To the moon and back with 2K words of RAM and 36K words of ROM.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_Guidance_Computer
http://history.nasa.gov/afj/compessay.htm

 

[Twayne]

At least with respect to XP, the "bit" -- or more accurately, the
"Read only" box in the Windows Explorer Properties GUI for folders --
actually does have a use.

It has 3 states. Its initial state is "neutral" but this may appear
to be "filled in." If you click it once, the box clears; click a
second
time and a check will appear in the box. After one or two clicks, as
the case may be, if you then click OK or Apply, you will get a dialog
noting that you are about to make an attribute change to set or unset
read only, and asking if you want to "Apply changes to this folder
only" or
"Apply changes to this folder, subfolders and files".

AFACT, the first choice does nothing. If you select "Apply changes to
this folder, subfolders and files" all files that are contained in
"this folder" and any subfolders will have their read-only attribute
set or unset.

Yeah; I was referring more to the content of the URL he supplied. It
does a good job of explaining what's going on. It always helps to
remember things when one has a grasp of what's actually going on. I
bookmarked it for posterity as a matter of fact..

Regards,

Twayne