On Thu, Oct 02, 2008 at 10:24:13AM +0200, Peter Rabbitson wrote: > I finally came back to using schroot, and was delighted to find the > feature I proposed some time ago fully implemented.
You're welcome! I know it took some time to finally implement this; it required some thought and finding enough free time to do, including writing schroot-mount to do it. > I have a > documentation/example question though. Everywhere in the documentation > and in the default fstab file you assert that "The format of this file > is the same as for /etc/fstab, documented in fstab(5)". However in my > initial proposal I dropped the 5th and 6th field, namely fs_freq and > fs_passno. Is there a reason to maintain those without mentioning that > their values are ignored? Or are the values in fact interpreted in some way? We use the standard POSIX getmntent family of functions to read the file; these are the same functions used to read /etc/fstab and /etc/mtab. As a result, the file format is identical, and this requires using all 6 fields. This is more reliable than parsing the file ourselves--we use the system parser that all other programs use. We don't mention that the values are ignored; this is partly because you have to write values as you would in /etc/fstab (i.e. 0 0), and partly because this gives us the ability to use them in the future if we wanted to run fsck on session startup, for example. Regards, Roger -- .''`. Roger Leigh : :' : Debian GNU/Linux http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/ `. `' Printing on GNU/Linux? http://gutenprint.sourceforge.net/ `- GPG Public Key: 0x25BFB848 Please GPG sign your mail. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
