From owner-freebsd-bugs Thu Apr 8 12:32: 7 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.FreeBSD.ORG [204.216.27.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5629F15201 for ; Thu, 8 Apr 1999 12:32:02 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.9.2/8.9.2) id MAA95956; Thu, 8 Apr 1999 12:30:02 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 12:30:02 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199904081930.MAA95956@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Cc: From: "Andrew J. Korty" Subject: Re: bin/11031: [PATCH] mount and umount support for mortal users Reply-To: "Andrew J. Korty" Sender: owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org The following reply was made to PR bin/11031; it has been noted by GNATS. From: "Andrew J. Korty" To: Bob Bishop Cc: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: bin/11031: [PATCH] mount and umount support for mortal users Date: Thu, 08 Apr 1999 14:29:40 -0500 > What's wrong with sudo(8)? > > > -- > Bob Bishop (0118) 977 4017 international code +44 118 > rb@gid.co.uk fax (0118) 989 4254 between 0800 and 1800 UK Replacing the mount command makes the KDE device "objects" work. They want to exec mount explicitly. We can put machines in a lab configured so that these devices show up on users' Desktops. Then they don't even need to know how to use mount and umount. We tried this with am-utils, but it's just not ready for this kind of thing. I guess we could make a KDE program object that ran a script than ran sudo, but then unmounting the device would be unintuitive. I think my way is much cleaner. Hope that makes sense :-) ... ajk To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-bugs" in the body of the message