Messages in this thread | | | From | Gerry <> | Subject | supermount ? | Date | Thu, 22 Mar 2001 23:21:07 +0100 |
| |
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 this.
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; why isn't supermount a standard part of the kernel, or at least a module ?
Right now i have to use autofs to manage automounting, but there's several problems with that (as it's aimed at use with network devices): Fx, it locks my dvd/cdrw-drives every time they get mounted, so that eject isn't possible until it gets unmounted. Floppy disks aren't updated until they're remounted. Setting low timeouts doesn't help at this, since it doesn't seem to work that well with local devices for some reason..
So, supermount is required even if autofs is included in the kernel, from my point of view anyway. I'm sure there's many people out there like me :)
Any chance supermount will be a standard kernel module in the future ?
Gerry - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |