Andrey Borzenkov wrote: >> In the meantime, I'm pretty sure the new competitor to supermount >> (the name is \ >> slipping my mind at the moment) supports ignoring options that >> don't apply to the \ >> filesystem it finds, and supermount may also. > > 1. It is not a competitor. Sorry. There are zillions way to mount > filesystem on access or even on insert (one of them - integrating > automount in core VFS - was posted recently on lkml) but none of > them so far provides a way to change busy media.
Well, you know what I meant. It's meant as an "alternative." I'm not even saying we should use it, you're right that it's not good for busy media. It waits a whole second after last use to umount, that just won't cut it for floppies. I could duplicate that behavior (and have actually) with autofs, but it just isn't good enough for end users. > 2. Do you suggest to recompile submoount, supermount, mount or whatever > every time new filesystem is added? Well, auto is usually used for removable media filesystems, so I'd say yes, just for when new removable media filesystems are added, which isn't that often. > -andrey
