18

Is there a way to check the permissions of the root folder, /? I mean the folder's permissions, not its content's (/var, /usr, etc.) permissions? Running ls /.. shows the content's permissions.

Improve this question
5
  • Have you tried the -l option: ls -l / – slackmart Mar 25 '14 at 0:59
  • 2
    Yes, it shows the contents; I wanted the contents of the outer folder, which doesn't technically exist. The question is already answered anyway. – trysis Mar 25 '14 at 1:22
  • Can you please edit your title to not include the text "/root", because web searched for "/root " come here and that doesn't make any sense. Perhaps you could just say (/), and then lower down in the text clarify that you are not referring to /root. Thanks – Elliptical view Oct 19 '16 at 21:02
  • If I did that, people would come here looking for /root folder permissions, which also does not make sense. I'll be damned if I do, damned if I don't. – trysis Oct 19 '16 at 22:20
  • -1 Because you have not yet changed the title to simply /, I came here looking for permission of /root (because that's how google works.) – Elliptical view Mar 24 '18 at 1:06
62

You can also use the -d switch of ls:

$ ls -ld /
drwxr-xr-x 28 root root 126976 Mar 20 17:11 /

From man ls:

   -l     use a long listing format
   -d, --directory
          list  directory entries instead of contents, and do not derefer‐
          ence symbolic links
Improve this answer
0
24

stat -c "%a %n" /

It will give you the permissions.

Improve this answer
6
  • 1
    Thanks, that was fast. stat seems like an interesting, useful command, having read its man page. – trysis Mar 25 '14 at 1:02
  • You should use the a switch to see the permissions of . which corresponds to root home. – Ramesh Mar 25 '14 at 1:05
  • Yeah, that's what the other answer says, and what I should have thought of. D'oh! – trysis Mar 25 '14 at 1:15
  • ha ha. You can accept either of the 2 answers. Both the answers seem to suit what you need :) – Ramesh Mar 25 '14 at 1:18
  • Ugh, I wish I could accept both. They're both perfect! – trysis Mar 25 '14 at 1:19
16

Use the -a switch of ls to include hidden files as well as . and .. in the listing and the -l switch for a "long" listing (which includes the permissions, among other information):

ls -la /

The line with a single . in the last column will contain information about the listed directory itself, i.e. /:

drwxr-xr-x 26 root root 4096 Mar 10 15:57 .

However if you only need information about / itself, terdon's answer (using the -d switch) will probably be handier.

Improve this answer
10
  • 1
    @trysis I routinely use ls -blah. It has everything you could possibly want to know about a file or directory. – n.st Mar 25 '14 at 1:06
  • 2
    This is not really a very good solution, it will list all files under / when all the OP wanted was / itself. See stat or ls -ld in the answers below. – terdon♦ Mar 25 '14 at 2:08
  • 1
    @trysis You might want to accept terdon's answer instead since it's closer to what you originally wanted to achieve. – n.st Mar 25 '14 at 3:14
  • 1
    Fair enough, the comment was not so much directed at you as to future users who might see this as the accepted answer and assume it is the Best Way® to do it. – terdon♦ Mar 25 '14 at 3:15
  • 2
    . is not necessarily first. The list is sorted lexically. There are several characters that sort before . in many locales. – Stéphane Chazelas Mar 25 '14 at 12:12

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.