Date: Thu, 24 Aug 1995 17:05:17 +0200 (MET DST) From: J Wunsch <j@uriah.heep.sax.de> To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org (FreeBSD hackers) Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sbin/mount mntopts.h mount.c Message-ID: <199508241505.RAA16922@uriah.heep.sax.de> In-Reply-To: <17617.809267994@time.cdrom.com> from "Jordan K. Hubbard" at Aug 24, 95 05:39:54 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
As Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: > > > Is what I am saying, is don't change default behavior, make it more > > flexiable. Defaults are not sutiable for all sites, so changeing them > > As was my motivation behind committing noauto. How in the dickens did > we get off in the tangent about modifying rc now?? Maybe we > should take this off committers? :) (moved to -hackers) Well, i'm still claiming that it's not a matter of "noauto" or not, it's simply inappropriate for most people around to have the multi- user boot fail simply because the CD didn't mount, while they would like to have the CD auto-mounted whenever there is a medium in the drive at boot time (thus, "noauto" wouldn't help). I'm currently running such a configuration, and i don't think my machine is too much off the "generic user's expectation" :) in this area. The "noauto" thing might have other merits (not typing the full mount command line, allow non-root mounts), but it's IMHO the wrong workaround for just _this_ problem.. -- cheers, J"org joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de -- http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199508241505.RAA16922>