You might not have to reformat - this sounds as though it could be an
owner/permissions problem to me. Open up a terminal window and type
'sudo nautilus', entering your password when prompted, you can then
navigate to where you have the files stored, right-click on one of them
and select 'Properties'.

Under the permissions tab, you'll see the owner, group and 'other'
permissions. Chances are that you'll be subject to the 'other'
permissions which, I'm prepared to bet, will be 'Read only'.

As you've 'sudo'ed' into nautilus, you'll have root access and so can
change owner, group and permissions to how you want them - or simply
delete the files, if that's what you want.

In terminal I typed in Sudo and got an error no such file.
So i typed in Su then gave a password. Found the drive and got into
properties you are right the files are read only they can only be
changed by root which I apparently am not.
It won't let me change the settings. Shouldn't su let me be root? I
have been setting here reading the ubuntu book trying to figure the
root, sudo, su relationship out. Can you help me here.

Su is for root, but in ubuntu for secerity reasons it is sudo. If you run like
Gentoo it would be Sudo. In other Linux O/S is it "yum" and it can be confusing
to all hell on what is what.
It sounds like maybe the drive is not mounted all proper. Did Ubuntu mount
automatic?
http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntu/mountlinux
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=409952
Of course if you are not getting the answers here. I would highly recommend on
Ubuntu forums.
http://ubuntuforums.org

You are right - 'su' is short for 'superuser' and gives you root
privileges within the terminal. However, Ubuntu does not have a
'proper' root and relies on 'sudo' instead (which, IIRC, is short for
'superuser do' and gives you root privileges on the specified program only).

When you typed in 'su', did the prompt change from '...$' to '...#'?
If not, then you are not in superuser mode. I suspect that you put in
your own password when prompted, which won't work; you need to enter
root's password. (To set up a root password, click on
System>Administration>Users and Groups, enter your password and then
highlight root in the dialog that appears. Click on Properties and it
should be obvious where you need to set the password. However, I don't
actually recommend doing this.)

As to sudo not working, did you type in the command exactly as given?
This is an Ubuntu default and is set up so that all users have sudo
rights. 'sudo nautilus' should be a single command
(sudo nautilus). The only way I can replicate your error is by
making a typo.

don't feel bad I've been called worse than junk.
I typed in 'sudo nautilus' and got bash sudo nautilus comand
not found

Can you run any other programs with 'sudo ' (eg gedit)?
If no, can you run them from the terminal without the 'sudo ' bit?
If yes, can you check in Synaptic to see if sudo is installed?
If it is, try re-installing it (and take the obvious action if it isn't

it works with or with out sudo and nautilus does to ? If i type
sudo I get sudo: -k | -l|-v and so on. now this is in terminal

Those files were put on the hard drive by windows xp and I may have set
them read only muself Is it possible i might have to plug into a
windows computer to open up access to them?

I can open nautilus or gedit with or without sudo. With sudo alone I
get usage sudo -k| -l|-v and so on

Need to clear up something on "superuser". Superuser is used to "Imatate" ANY
USER in the system. As an Admin you quite often have to be logged in as user
"Dave" to duplicate the problems that Dave is having. That is the real use of
SU. SU can ben "Any" user not just root.

I have not got it right in my head yet. Is Su and Sudo the same
thing can either one be root. I have to set down with the book again
tonight and read. Somehow I have gotten this thing confused and I am
never going to be able to do this with out understanding.

You're having a perspective issue, not to worry.

From the Linux / Ubuntu perspective yes either one can be root. Sudo means
"superuser does" and was first seen in SCO UNIX, and from our frame of mind we
are logged in always as a user and never "Root", so to get stuff done we must
become Root to administer the system.

In large UNIX shops you will find that most system admin's are logged in as
Root and never as a user. So, when Butthead Bob or Winning Willie are your line
telling you that the system isn't reponding, you the SysAdmin, must be able to
take on their identity in the system. That is where the command su winniewillie
will let you login in has him. He then can take you threw the exact same steps
that created his problem. Most of which were waking up that morning.

We never did that (yes, we were a large shop, over 50 servers
and over 1000 desktops). Too easy to make a fatal typo when logged in
as root. We'd only "su -" to root when needed and exit root as soon as
possible.

I'm sure that's not the way things are universally done, but it is how
we did it.

> where the command su winniewillie will let you login in has him. He then can
take you
> threw the exact same steps that created his problem. Most of which were
waking up that

In this situation, always try he su with a "-" switch first ("su -").
This causes the user's login scripts to be executed, and lets you see
if they are the problem. If they are, then you might want to do an
"su" without the "-" and try to fix the problem as that user.

BTW, if you really want a root shell in Ubuntu, you can always do a
"sudo -s", which starts a root shell. Just be very careful doing this,
and exit root as soon as possible. Or don't do it at all, that's what
many people prefer, sudo for everything, much safer.

I tried to get the guys to do that "su -" thing, but most just logged right in
as root. Our shop was a bit smaller than yours. Thanks for the tip on sudo -s
I didn't know that one. That makes life a bunch easier at the command line for
me.