- All mount points in /mnt (e.g. /mnt/cdrom, /mnt/camera, /mnt/windows/C)
<- breaks
FreeBSD standard for an empty /mnt
Might be workable if there was a /mnt/mnt, but that's so ridiculous I'd
be against it as a matter of humour-prevention :-)
It would be o.k., if you call it /mnt/tmp with the
Could you also explain to me why you think that /var would be such
a bad place for this?
Well, I probably can't give a hard and fast absolute reason, but...
We use /var as a place for directoreis/files that can grow somewhat
unexpectedly and weakly controlled, such as spool and logs, etc.
Because
On Saturday 22 November 2003 8:18, Charles Swiger wrote:
> /mnt should be reserved as a default temporary mount point-- it's silly
> to risk breaking existing tools or procedures. Anyway, I suggest you
> solicit feedback from Solaris users and possibly MacOS X people as
> well. Solaris features v
On Sat, Nov 22, 2003 at 02:18:30PM -0500, Charles Swiger wrote:
> Obviously, a standard that says "place mount points anywhere you want"
> isn't very useful. But if you did come up with a standard, who should
> follow it and what would they gain?
I don't want to speak for the FHS, but I do want
On Nov 21, 2003, at 9:41 AM, Frank Murphy wrote:
The folks at the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard (FHS) are discussing
(again) where directories for recurring temporary mount points should
go.
Recurring temporary mount points are for things like cdroms, floppies,
and digital cameras as well as HD pa
On Fri, Nov 21, 2003 at 10:07:31AM -0500, Jerry McAllister wrote:
> Less Good:
> > - All mount points in /mnt (e.g. /mnt/cdrom, /mnt/camera, /mnt/windows/C)
> > <- breaks
> > FreeBSD standard for an empty /mnt
/mnts
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing l
Frank Murphy wrote:
The folks at the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard (FHS) are discussing
(again) where directories for recurring temporary mount points should go.
Recurring temporary mount points are for things like cdroms, floppies,
and digital cameras as well as HD partitions from other OSes (lik
>>
> The folks at the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard (FHS) are discussing
> (again) where directories for recurring temporary mount points should go.
> Recurring temporary mount points are for things like cdroms, floppies,
> and digital cameras as well as HD partitions from other OSes (like MS
> Win
On Fri, Nov 21, 2003 at 03:41:16PM +0100, Frank Murphy wrote:
> The folks at the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard (FHS) are discussing
> (again) where directories for recurring temporary mount points should go.
> Recurring temporary mount points are for things like cdroms, floppies,
> and digital came
>
> One of the ideas behind this new directory of mount points is that some kind
> of automounter could then create and delete directories someplace as needed
> without affecting anyone. So while not as large in K as a logfile, the
> contents of the directory could get pretty large. (Probably a
On Friday 21 November 2003 6:36, Jerry McAllister wrote:
> > Could you also explain to me why you think that /var would be such
> > a bad place for this?
>
> Well, I probably can't give a hard and fast absolute reason, but...
> We use /var as a place for directoreis/files that can grow somewhat
>
>
>
>
> > > It sounds like you think that a new root-level directory should be
> > > created for this, and that /media would be OK, but there might be a (yet
> > > undiscovered) better name. Is this accurate?
> >
> > That seems like a pretty good summary.
> >
> > jerry
>
> Cool.
> Coul
On Fri 2003-11-21 (15:41), Frank Murphy wrote:
[snip]
> - Anyplace at all
I'm for this one. I like a purple bikeshed.
--
/~\ The ASCII ASCII stupid question, get a EBCDIC ANSI.
\ / Ribbon Campaign John Oxley
X Against HTMLhttp://oxo.rucus.net/
/ \ Email! oxo
On Fri, Nov 21, 2003 at 04:31:19PM +0100, Frank Murphy typed:
>
> On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 10:07:31 -0500 (EST), "Jerry McAllister"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
[...]
> > > Anyplace at all
> > Now, that is not much of a standard - why bother?
>
> Well, the idea would be that the standard wouldn't b
> > It sounds like you think that a new root-level directory should be
> > created for this, and that /media would be OK, but there might be a (yet
> > undiscovered) better name. Is this accurate?
>
> That seems like a pretty good summary.
>
> jerry
Cool. Could you also explain to me why y
> > > Anyplace at all
> > Now, that is not much of a standard - why bother?
>
> Well, the idea would be that the standard wouldn't bother. :)
>
> It sounds like you think that a new root-level directory should be
> created for this, and that /media would be OK, but there might be a (yet
> undi
On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 10:07:31 -0500 (EST), "Jerry McAllister"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> Good:
> > - All mount points in / (e.g. /cdrom, /camera, /windows/C) <- current
> > FreeBSD standard
>
> (Just come up with a nice sounding name for each)
The problem isn't what the names of the direc
>
> ...
>
> I imagine your answer will be something like "We don't care; do what you
> want," but I would like to present the different ideas, and perhaps you
> would prefer one.
>
> So, please put these in the order of most to least preferred, and say why
> you like or dislike any of them.
>
O
Frank Murphy wrote:
The folks at the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard (FHS) are discussing
(again) where directories for recurring temporary mount points should go.
Recurring temporary mount points are for things like cdroms, floppies,
and digital cameras as well as HD partitions from other OSes (lik
19 matches
Mail list logo
