sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
- From: Casey Harkins <charkins AT upl.cs.wisc.edu>
- To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] problems with mtab
- Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:49:17 -0600 (CST)
On Mon, 9 Dec 2002, Nick Jennings wrote:
> > The init.d spell is becoming a catch-all for things, at the moment, by
> > default. There are some loose cannon's in this, it appears. I have
> > gotten reports from many people on this who have the symlinks, and it
> > may be from a particular iso, at the moment, my thought is how to
> > correct it.
>
> Hmm. I think it may be a better move to keep init.d's purpose very
> specific to init organization, and make another spell which keeps
> track of the very basic files needed in a sourcemage system.
I agree. What happened to using a basesystem spell for all of the basic
structure? Ideally, every file on a fresh install should be tracked by
sorcery. I see a basesystem spell in the grimoire, but the SOURCE* vars
are all commented out.
In fact, it might be better to break this down even further. There should
be one spell to setup the "/dev" directory, one spell for init.d (which we
already have), one spell for "/etc", and one spell (basesystem?) to hold
the basic directory structure.
That way if I hose my /dev directory, I can cast 'basesystem-dev" or
something to get it back.
The basesystem spell as described above wouldn't be very useful, since you
would need the basic directory structure in place to cast it, but at least
the directories would be tracked by sorcery. Also, it would be a
dependency for the "/dev" and "/etc" spells.
> It appears your mtab is a symlink. It really *should* be a normal file
> for mount to behave correctly. Please perform the following commands if
> you do not want to receive this message again:
>
> # ...<commands>...
I agree. However, we should get this right on the next iso.
-casey
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] how to allow users to mount/umount cdroms correctly
, (continued)
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] how to allow users to mount/umount cdroms correctly,
nealbirch, 12/08/2002
-
[SM-Discuss] problems with mtab,
nealbirch, 12/08/2002
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] problems with mtab,
Jonathan Evraire, 12/08/2002
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] problems with mtab,
Jack Bertram, 12/09/2002
- Re: [SM-Discuss] problems with mtab, nealbirch, 12/09/2002
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] problems with mtab,
Jack Bertram, 12/09/2002
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] problems with mtab,
Nick Jennings, 12/08/2002
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] problems with mtab,
nealbirch, 12/08/2002
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] problems with mtab,
Nick Jennings, 12/09/2002
- Re: [SM-Discuss] problems with mtab, nealbirch, 12/09/2002
- Re: [SM-Discuss] problems with mtab, Dufflebunk, 12/10/2002
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] problems with mtab,
Casey Harkins, 12/10/2002
- Re: [SM-Discuss] problems with mtab, nealbirch, 12/10/2002
- Re: [SM-Discuss] problems with mtab, Dufflebunk, 12/10/2002
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] problems with mtab,
Nick Jennings, 12/09/2002
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] problems with mtab,
nealbirch, 12/08/2002
- Re: [SM-Discuss] problems with mtab, Tom Garland, 12/08/2002
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] problems with mtab,
Jonathan Evraire, 12/08/2002
-
[SM-Discuss] problems with mtab,
nealbirch, 12/08/2002
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] how to allow users to mount/umount cdroms correctly,
nealbirch, 12/08/2002
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.