So sprach Chmouel Boudjnah am Fri, May 04, 2001 at 11:21:08AM +0100:
> Alexander Skwar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Uhm, what are the advantages of supermount compared to using autofs to mount
> > removable media on the fly?
>
> write update supermount doe it asynced.. but we think soon to switch
> to autofs or other alternative or rewrote a new supermount.
The first part of the sentence means:
"Supermount does async writes", does it? If so - what's the point?
supermount is used for removable media, like CD-Rom, floppy or ZIPs, isn't
it? Well, for CD-Roms I don't care at all how supermount does writes :),
and for floppies and ZIPs I'd prefer sync writes anyway. Although this may
be a performance hit (the sync writes), I don't care about this either.
Especially with floppies it's better to have sync writes, so that the user
can eject the floppy right away. ZIPs can block ejects (can't they?), but
still - ZIPs are so slow, that this doesn't matter anyway (at least not to
me).
Alexander Skwar
--
How to quote: http://learn.to/quote (german) http://quote.6x.to (english)
Homepage: http://www.digitalprojects.com | http://www.iso-top.de
iso-top.de - Die g�nstige Art an Linux Distributionen zu kommen
Uptime: 2 hours 21 minutes
