No, you're right Alex, they're probably better termed "top-level directories" as you suggest. Being a newbie in Linux (after only Windows experience) is still a bit confusing at the moment! As far as I know, the main logical partitions of the HD on my Linux machine are "primary" and "swap". Nevertheless, I would be happier getting something out of the "volumes" request rather than nothing at all. Rebol seem to have taken the same view, but I acknowledge that the list of "top-level directories" does not exactly correspond to the description "volumes", and might be misleading.
Since you obviously have much more experience than I regarding this subject, you might be able to give me a tip or two. For example, let's suppose I have 2 HDs on my computer, and for the sake of argument I have separate distros of Linux installed on each of them with a dual boot on my PC. And say I am running RR under the Linux on my first HD. How should I (or indeed can I) access data on the 2nd HD? If you could clear the fog a little, I'd be grateful. Thanks. Bob ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alex Tweedly" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Bob Warren" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2005 4:23 PM Subject: Re: No volumes in Linux? > Bob Warren wrote: > > >Thanks Alex and Ken! > > > >I have just tried the same thing in RB and Rebol. RB also returns empty. > >Interestingly, Rebol gives a list of the partitions created by Linux - which > >at least is a bit more useful. > > > >e.g. > >/usr > >/bin > >/boot > >/dev > >/home > >etc. > > > > > > > Are each of those really separate partitions ? Not simply different > top-level directories ? > > >Does this really mean that although a computer may have 2 or 3 physical > >drives, there is no way that RR can discover this in Linux? If so, I find > >that rather disappointing, don't you? > > > > > > > No, I don't really. > > Physical disks ? > Even on Win, "the volumes" gives you logical partitions, not physical > disks. (e.g. my C: and D: are on the same disk, and Z: is on another > machine entirely.Sometimes there is also Y: volume - and it's on the > same disk (on the other machine) as Z: ). > > On Unix, the mappings between top-level directories, partitions (or > logical volumes as some Unix file systems call them) and physical disks > are even more tenuous (even before we get to automount partitions ....). > > What is it that you really want to know ? > > > -- > Alex Tweedly http://www.tweedly.net > > > > -- > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. > Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.10.18/90 - Release Date: 05/09/2005 > _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list [email protected] Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
