Danny 

Really I haven't seen supermount runing perfectly under 2.4; so, as you
say, is a good idea take in account other possibilities (Volumagic?) for
the future. Anyway I am according to you in the need of change the
default in 9.0 enabling, or, if it is not possible in the final
distribution, adding the solution in "errata".

Francisco Alcaraz
Murcia (Spain)



----- Mensaje Original -----
Remitente: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Fecha: Lunes, Septiembre 30, 2002 5:13 pm
Asunto: [Cooker] supermount

> 
> I feel a bit responsible for the current state of supermount, since 
> I 
> talked Juan into fixing floppy-write-PANIC issues, which seems to 
> have 
> utterly broken supermount for CDROMS in the released 9.0 kernel.
> 
> A simple 'find' in /mnt/cdrom will probably reveal what I'm talking 
> about 
> (half the files cannot be stat-ed). In addition, there is the 
> problem of 
> non-freeing inodes on zips and floppies.
> 
> Juan, Andrey and probably others, did a great job on patching up 
> supermount for each release, but I do have to admit that I have not 
> seem 
> it working without problems in the 2.4.x series.
> 
> So, the question is, since the default enabling of supermount is 
> bound to
> get people into trouble (try to install a game or whatever from 
> CD), 
> shouldn't there be an update ASAP for 9.0 with a 1) a fix or 2) 
> disabled 
> default supermount. At least it should be added to the errate page.
> 
> 
> For cooker I really would like to hear (Juavolumagic:
> http://ftp.linux.org.uk/pub/linu
> 
> it mounts disks in userspace, and works already for CDROM drives.
> Is there any reason not to move to this tool for 9.1? It needs some 
> work, 
> but on the long therm certainly looks like a better solution than 
> supermount.
> 
> One problem remains that can perhaps only be fixed in the kernel: 
> floppiesneed to sync immediatly (==performance loss) when writing, 
> because the 
> possibility of a manual eject on pc-hardware (this is probably a 
> design 
> error, MAC does it better;)
> 
> bye,
> Danny
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 


Reply via email to