On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 10:37 AM, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Natanael! > >> udisks needs support for the uhelper option to mount/umount[1] and >> currently udisks does not work at all with busybox mount/umount. (I >> hacked[2] udisks but its not getting accept from upstream udisks) > > IMHO udisks is a daemon based on D-BUS and usually used on full fledged > desktop systems. So do you really need to blow up the code of > Busybox for such stuff? Can't you use the upstream mount/umount for > this?
Sure I can. I don't need use busybox at all. There are tools that does the same from other places (like GNU). And most people can just easily insert another RAM or have bigger disk. But I don't want that bloat. Thats why I use busybox (and uclibc) in first place. Thats why my desktop system is smaller and faster than the traditional linux desktops. > ... just to say what I think about this. If the udisk developers don't > feel any needs to accept patches making there software work with > a more POSIX conforming system, why shall anybody consider to add > special support to Busybox? That specific patch simply removed the uhelper support which is not a good solution. I misunderstood what the code really did. > I know I'm being provocative, so read this as: Can you give an > explanation why this shall be included into Busybox? For what is it > really need in a bare Busybox based system (that is no upstream > mount/umount available)? Etc. I am not really asking to include anything in busybox. I am asking for ideas how to make busybox and udisks play nice together - in a such way that it is acceptable both for udisks and busybox. btw. I'm not the first to ask about this. http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/busybox/2010-July/072809.html -- Natanael Copa _______________________________________________ busybox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
