Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 08 Jul 2006 10:37:12 -0600
From:      Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org>
To:        Craig Rodrigues <rodrigc@crodrigues.org>
Cc:        freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: [RFC] mount can figure out fstype automatically
Message-ID:  <44AFDF38.3030707@samsco.org>
In-Reply-To: <20060708160931.GA3871@crodrigues.org>
References:  <20060708152801.GA3671@crodrigues.org> <86ac7krtu1.fsf@xps.des.no> <20060708160931.GA3871@crodrigues.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Craig Rodrigues wrote:

> On Sat, Jul 08, 2006 at 05:37:26PM +0200, Dag-Erling Smrgrav wrote:
> 
>>What about cases where there may be several matching file systems?
>>For instance, a clean ext3 file system is also a valid ext2 file
>>system (and vice versa).
> 
> 
> Currently, FreeBSD can only mount ext2 with mount -t ext2fs.
> 
> A better example would probably be udf and cd9660 filesystems.
> 
> Right now the logic is to iterate over the list of known local
> filesystems (always starting with "ufs"), skipping over "synthetic"
> and "network" filesystems,
> i.e. similar to the list produced by lsvfs:
> 
> Filesystem                        Refs Flags
> -------------------------------- ----- ---------------
> ufs                                  8 
> reiserfs                             0 read-only
> nfs4                                 0 network
> ext2fs                               0 
> ntfs                                 0 
> cd9660                               0 read-only
> procfs                               1 synthetic
> msdosfs                              0 
> xfs                                  0 
> devfs                                1 synthetic
> nfs                                  0 network
> 
> 
> 
> The first matching filesystem wins....not perfect, but
> maybe good enough for a lot of cases.
> 
> mount -t always works if you want to specify the fstype.
> 

Where is udf in the list?  Btw, it's not that udf and cd9660 are
compatible, they aren't by any means.  It's that the can co-exist on
the same media, and often times a UDF filesystem has cd9660 structures
available for compatibility.  If you added udf to your list above with a
higher priority than cd9660, everything should 'just work', and you'd
still be able to override it manually.

Scott




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?44AFDF38.3030707>