It seems like I am another one who needs to pay more attention to
the address field when doing a reply :)

I did a reply to Nick instead of BLFS-support.

Just for completeness, and for what it's worth, I post the
lacking mails of this thread.



On 9/24/05, Luca Dionisi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks a lot Nick (is your name Nick or Matteo?)
>
> On 9/24/05, Nick Matteo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > I suggest that you have the actual autofs directory be somewhere else,
> > eg /var/autofs, and have each mountplace be a symlink in /mnt to 
> > /var/autofs,
> > eg /mnt/cd -> /var/autofs/cd.
> > When you do ls /mnt, currently usable devices will be valid symlinks (light
> > blue if your ls output is colored) and unusable devices will be invalid
> > symlinks (red in ls.)
> > Caveat: Doing an ls on /mnt can take a long time this way!
> >
>
> I was thinking about a solution of this type. I didn't know about
> the colors of ls being different if the symlink is valid or not. Good.
> But, why did you say that ls on /mnt can take a long time?
>
> > > 2. when I have mounted a cdrom, the timeout (yes, I
> > >     know I can configure the value) ... is it the only way
> > >     to remove the cd? I mean, is there no way to remove
> > >     the cd before the inactivity timeout expires? Even
> > >     if there is no user or process accessing the files in
> > >     it? ...ehm, I mean without being root.
> >
> > Why is this a problem?  Just set the timeout lower if it is locking the 
> > drive.
> > If there's no user or process accessing it, it shouldn't be mounted; a
> > timeout of two seconds is fine for CDs.
>
> Ok, I will try that way.
> But, I was thinking that if I set a very low timeout and, for example,
> a program is looking for a file in the cd every now and then, the
> continuous mount and umount of the file system could slow down
> the performance.
> Anyway, as an unprivileged user I can do a 'cd' in a position inside
> the CD and leave that directory when I don't need the cd anymore...
> I think this can do the job. Good, again.
>
> Drop me a line, anyone, if I said something wrong here.
>
> Luca
>





On 9/26/05, Nick Matteo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Saturday 24 September 2005 10:42, Luca Dionisi wrote:
> > Thanks a lot Nick (is your name Nick or Matteo?)
>
> My first name is Nick ;-)
>
> > I was thinking about a solution of this type. I didn't know about
> > the colors of ls being different if the symlink is valid or not. Good.
> > But, why did you say that ls on /mnt can take a long time?
>
> Well, in order to determine the symlink status, it has to check the media in
> all the drives.  So whenever you do an ls on /mnt, it hangs while all the
> drives spin up and are mounted if available.
>
> > > Why is this a problem?  Just set the timeout lower if it is locking the
> > > drive. If there's no user or process accessing it, it shouldn't be
> > > mounted; a timeout of two seconds is fine for CDs.
> >
> > Ok, I will try that way.
> > But, I was thinking that if I set a very low timeout and, for example,
> > a program is looking for a file in the cd every now and then, the
> > continuous mount and umount of the file system could slow down
> > the performance.
> > Anyway, as an unprivileged user I can do a 'cd' in a position inside
> > the CD and leave that directory when I don't need the cd anymore...
> > I think this can do the job. Good, again.
>
> That would work.  I have never noticed any performance problems with letting
> the drive umount and remount itself, though.  It has to spin back up either
> way, so the mounting process isn't really noticeable.
>
> >
> > Drop me a line, anyone, if I said something wrong here.
> >
> > Luca
>


Thanks again Nick.
Apart for the performance, doing a "cd" in the directory of the mount
and leaving only when I don't need any more that media, may be useful
to avoid that someone else remove the media. Just in the case that one
user is accessing the system from a remote host. (rare case!)

Luca
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Reply via email to