well, for a bit of OT discussion sake, here's how it imho SHOULD work,
from user (noobs and non guru) desktop point of view:
cd/dvds: mounted automatically on insert / first access. if a program is
running from it (or a file is open from it), and user tries to eject it
using button, or any
well, for a bit of OT discussion sake, here's how it imho SHOULD work,
from user (noobs and non guru) desktop point of view:
cd/dvds: mounted automatically on insert / first access. if a program is
running from it (or a file is open from it), and user tries to eject it
using button, or any
On Sat, 23 Jul 2005, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> Am Freitag, 22. Juli 2005 18:38 schrieb Lasse Kärkkäinen / Tronic:
> > > Supermount is obsolete there are other tools in userspace that do the
> > > job perfectly.
> > > e.g ivman which uses hal and dbus.
> >
&
On Sat, 23 Jul 2005, Lasse K??rkk??inen / Tronic wrote:
> > To mount on demand use autofs. Unmounting and dealing with media removal
> > is the problem.
>
> Granted, that can get pretty close. However, having to use /auto/*
> instead of mounting directly where required often limits using it
> To mount on demand use autofs. Unmounting and dealing with media removal
> is the problem.
Granted, that can get pretty close. However, having to use /auto/*
instead of mounting directly where required often limits using it quite
a bit. Thus, I don't see it as a real alternative.
- Tronic -
Am Freitag, 22. Juli 2005 18:38 schrieb Lasse Kärkkäinen / Tronic:
> > Supermount is obsolete there are other tools in userspace that do the
> > job perfectly.
> > e.g ivman which uses hal and dbus.
>
> They cannot mount on demand, thus cannot do the same job. The boot
Am Freitag, 22. Juli 2005 18:38 schrieb Lasse Kärkkäinen / Tronic:
Supermount is obsolete there are other tools in userspace that do the
job perfectly.
e.g ivman which uses hal and dbus.
They cannot mount on demand, thus cannot do the same job. The boot
partition, for example
To mount on demand use autofs. Unmounting and dealing with media removal
is the problem.
Granted, that can get pretty close. However, having to use /auto/*
instead of mounting directly where required often limits using it quite
a bit. Thus, I don't see it as a real alternative.
- Tronic -
On Sat, 23 Jul 2005, Lasse K??rkk??inen / Tronic wrote:
To mount on demand use autofs. Unmounting and dealing with media removal
is the problem.
Granted, that can get pretty close. However, having to use /auto/*
instead of mounting directly where required often limits using it quite
a
On Sat, 23 Jul 2005, Oliver Neukum wrote:
Am Freitag, 22. Juli 2005 18:38 schrieb Lasse Kärkkäinen / Tronic:
Supermount is obsolete there are other tools in userspace that do the
job perfectly.
e.g ivman which uses hal and dbus.
They cannot mount on demand, thus cannot do the same
> Supermount is obsolete there are other tools in userspace that do the
> job perfectly.
> e.g ivman which uses hal and dbus.
They cannot mount on demand, thus cannot do the same job. The boot
partition, for example, is something that should only be mounted when
required. The same obvio
Supermount is obsolete there are other tools in userspace that do the
job perfectly.
e.g ivman which uses hal and dbus.
They cannot mount on demand, thus cannot do the same job. The boot
partition, for example, is something that should only be mounted when
required. The same obviously also
>2005/7/21, Lasse Kärkkäinen / Tronic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Is there a reason why this magnificient piece of software is not already
> in the mainline? It seems to be working very well and provides
> functionality that simply isn't available otherwise.
>
Hi Tronic,
S
Lasse K??rkk??inen / Tronic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> :
> Is there a reason why this magnificient piece of software is not already
> in the mainline?
Yes, there is. Please search the archives.
--
Ueimor
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message
Is there a reason why this magnificient piece of software is not already
in the mainline? It seems to be working very well and provides
functionality that simply isn't available otherwise.
For those who are not familiar with it: this system does on-demand
mounting when the mount point is accessed
Is there a reason why this magnificient piece of software is not already
in the mainline? It seems to be working very well and provides
functionality that simply isn't available otherwise.
For those who are not familiar with it: this system does on-demand
mounting when the mount point is accessed
Lasse K??rkk??inen / Tronic [EMAIL PROTECTED] :
Is there a reason why this magnificient piece of software is not already
in the mainline?
Yes, there is. Please search the archives.
--
Ueimor
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to
2005/7/21, Lasse Kärkkäinen / Tronic [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Is there a reason why this magnificient piece of software is not already
in the mainline? It seems to be working very well and provides
functionality that simply isn't available otherwise.
Hi Tronic,
Supermount is obsolete
Hi,
I'm using 2.6.12-rc1-bk1 with ck's supermount patch
(supermount-ng208-2611.diff) and am getting the following oops with 'find .
-name fred' from '/' when a disk is in my dvdrom drive:-
Kernel 2.6.12-rc1-bk1 on an i686 / ttyS0
chamonix.straightrunning.com login: Unable to handle kernel NULL
Hi,
I'm using 2.6.12-rc1-bk1 with ck's supermount patch
(supermount-ng208-2611.diff) and am getting the following oops with 'find .
-name fred' from '/' when a disk is in my dvdrom drive:-
Kernel 2.6.12-rc1-bk1 on an i686 / ttyS0
chamonix.straightrunning.com login: Unable to handle kernel NULL
Gustavo Guillermo Perez wrote:
Cause I play with old toys, (floppys) and ivman doesn't work properly on the
lastest gentoo with floppys, I retouch for a while the supermount patch from
sourceforge for kernel 2.6.11-rc1.
I'm a n00b on kernel, I do this only for general purposes helping some
Cause I play with old toys, (floppys) and ivman doesn't work properly on the
lastest gentoo with floppys, I retouch for a while the supermount patch from
sourceforge for kernel 2.6.11-rc1.
I'm a n00b on kernel, I do this only for general purposes helping some
friends, I know supermount should
Cause I play with old toys, (floppys) and ivman doesn't work properly on the
lastest gentoo with floppys, I retouch for a while the supermount patch from
sourceforge for kernel 2.6.11-rc1.
I'm a n00b on kernel, I do this only for general purposes helping some
friends, I know supermount should
Gustavo Guillermo Perez wrote:
Cause I play with old toys, (floppys) and ivman doesn't work properly on the
lastest gentoo with floppys, I retouch for a while the supermount patch from
sourceforge for kernel 2.6.11-rc1.
I'm a n00b on kernel, I do this only for general purposes helping some
I gree with Stevie Kieu and Sam Halliday
--
Best regards,
Dj_RzulF
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at
I gree with Stevie Kieu and Sam Halliday
--
Best regards,
Dj_RzulF
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at
Just my humble opinion, please dont laugh if I am
wrong, I think:
Supermount
JFS
I use the patch from IBM ; now running JFS, and notice
a bit improved performance than Reiserfs, it is good
file system, (they release stable (may be?) release
already). But It is hard, they only give the patch
Just my humble opinion, please dont laugh if I am
wrong, I think:
Supermount
JFS
I use the patch from IBM ; now running JFS, and notice
a bit improved performance than Reiserfs, it is good
file system, (they release stable (may be?) release
already). But It is hard, they only give the patch
Supermount has been integrated into the Mandrake 8 kernel (2.4);
I have been unable to locate the standalone patch for this, however.
Steve Kieu wrote:
>
> --- Sam Halliday <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This
> email was delivered to you by The Free
> > Internet,
>
Supermount has been integrated into the Mandrake 8 kernel (2.4);
I have been unable to locate the standalone patch for this, however.
Steve Kieu wrote:
--- Sam Halliday [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This
email was delivered to you by The Free
Internet,
a Business Online Group company
--- Sam Halliday <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This
email was delivered to you by The Free
> Internet,
> a Business Online Group company.
> http://www.thefreeinternet.net
I totally aggree, supermount is nice features and it
should be integrated into the main kernel
recently begun to have a look at the
kernel (i believe every workman should know his tools). but i have
noticed that supermount is not a standard part of the project, is there
any reason why this is? is it due to man power? i would have been less
shocked by the absense of other features
programs, i have recently
become interrested in the kernel (i believe everyone should have some
understanding of their tools),
i have noticed supermount is not a standard part of this project, is
there a good reason why this is? i apologise if this is a very silly
question as i am sure
programs, i have recently
become interrested in the kernel (i believe everyone should have some
understanding of their tools),
i have noticed supermount is not a standard part of this project, is
there a good reason why this is? i apologise if this is a very silly
question as i am sure
recently begun to have a look at the
kernel (i believe every workman should know his tools). but i have
noticed that supermount is not a standard part of the project, is there
any reason why this is? is it due to man power? i would have been less
shocked by the absense of other features
--- Sam Halliday [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This
email was delivered to you by The Free
Internet,
a Business Online Group company.
http://www.thefreeinternet.net
I totally aggree, supermount is nice features and it
should be integrated into the main kernel stream (just
my HO
this
happens on a device (to processes who have requested to get to know).
This has several advantages:
* Supermount don't need to be kernel-related at all, and so doesn't need to
be updated for each new kernel revision (cleaner kernel)
* Possible to get autorun on linux
* Can get rid of "inse
this
happens on a device (to processes who have requested to get to know).
This has several advantages:
* Supermount don't need to be kernel-related at all, and so doesn't need to
be updated for each new kernel revision (cleaner kernel)
* Possible to get autorun on linux
* Can get rid of "inse
> Supermount sounds to me like a very important part of linux, at least for us
> who like our cds/dvds/etc. to work as easily as in fx. windows. For linux to
> be popular among "normal" users, it should be present at every system with
> local removable drives. So, my
I don't know if this applies to 2.4.2, but there is a patch for 2.4.0:
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Lab/8144/supermount.html
/cyr
---
Lister: Shouldn't this plug in to something?
Holly: Yes, that joins up with the
I recently upgraded my kernel to version 2.4.2, with no problems at all,
except one: supermount. I guess you already know that supermount haven't been
upgraded to support 2.4.2 or even 2.4 yet, and i guess there's nothing to do
about that but wait. But that's not why i'm writing
I recently upgraded my kernel to version 2.4.2, with no problems at all,
except one: supermount. I guess you already know that supermount haven't been
upgraded to support 2.4.2 or even 2.4 yet, and i guess there's nothing to do
about that but wait. But that's not why i'm writing
I don't know if this applies to 2.4.2, but there is a patch for 2.4.0:
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Lab/8144/supermount.html
/cyr
---
Lister: Shouldn't this plug in to something?
Holly: Yes, that joins up with the
Supermount sounds to me like a very important part of linux, at least for us
who like our cds/dvds/etc. to work as easily as in fx. windows. For linux to
be popular among "normal" users, it should be present at every system with
local removable drives. So, my question is;
44 matches
Mail list logo
