recently, i re-emerged 'baselayout', which caused a set of candidates to be created for 'etc-update'. most were innocuous or easily understood, but one was for /etc/fstab , which seems both dangerous & unjustified.
my existing /etc/fstab is (omitting comment lines): /dev/hda1 /boot ext2 noauto,noatime 1 2 /dev/hda2 none swap sw 0 0 /dev/hda3 / reiserfs notail,noatime 1 1 /dev/hda5 /usr/local reiserfs notail,noatime 1 2 /dev/hda6 /home reiserfs notail,noatime 1 2 /dev/hda7 /ya reiserfs notail,noatime 1 2 /dev/hda8 /yb reiserfs noauto,notail,noatime 1 2 /dev/hda9 /z reiserfs notail,noatime 1 2 /dev/cdroms/cdrom0 /mnt/cdrom iso9660 noauto,ro 0 0 none /proc proc defaults 0 0 none /dev/shm tmpfs defaults 0 0 the new one created by 'baselayout' ( ._cfg0000_fstab ) is : /dev/BOOT /boot ext2 noauto,noatime 1 1 /dev/ROOT / xfs noatime 0 0 /dev/SWAP none swap sw 0 0 /dev/cdroms/cdrom0 /mnt/cdrom iso9660 noauto,ro 0 0 none /proc proc defaults 0 0 none /dev/shm tmpfs defaults 0 0 NB esp that / is shown as 'xfs' a/a the correct 'reiserfs'. why does 'baselayout' want to rewrite /etc/fstab at all ? why does it want to misidentify the type of file system ? this looks like something which deserves attention & possible remedy. -- ========================,,============================================ SUPPORT ___________//___, Philip Webb : [EMAIL PROTECTED] ELECTRIC /] [] [] [] [] []| Centre for Urban & Community Studies TRANSIT `-O----------O---' University of Toronto -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
