-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 17:06:17 +0100
Source: kernel-patch-2.4-supermount-ng
Binary: kernel-patch-2.4-supermount-ng
Architecture: source all
Version: 1.2.11-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Mika Fischer [EMAIL PROTECTED
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 14:45:52 +0200
Source: kernel-patch-2.4-supermount-ng
Binary: kernel-patch-2.4-supermount-ng
Architecture: source all
Version: 1.2.9-3
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 18:31:10 +0200
Source: kernel-patch-2.4-supermount-ng
Binary: kernel-patch-2.4-supermount-ng
Architecture: source all
Version: 1.2.9-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Mika Fischer [EMAIL PROTECTED
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2003 16:01:47 +0200
Source: kernel-patch-2.4-supermount-ng
Binary: kernel-patch-2.4-supermount-ng
Architecture: source all
Version: 1.2.9-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 15:50:21 +0200
Source: kernel-patch-2.4-supermount-ng
Binary: kernel-patch-2.4-supermount-ng
Architecture: source all
Version: 1.2.7a-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed
Package: wnpp
Version: unavailable; reported 2003-07-02
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: kernel-patch-2.4-supermount-ng
Version : 1.2.7a
Upstream Author : Andrey Borzenkov [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Stephen Tweedie ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Alexis
will be unmounted after a 'user defined' time. I've chosen 5
seconds, so at most, I'll have to wait 5 seconds between the last time I
access the medium and the moment I want to eject the medium.
I cannot get nautilus or gmc to work well with automount... will they
work with supermount? I'd
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Is there a particular reason why Supermount couldn't be included in the
debian unstable kernels as an option? It works brilliantly on Mandrake, and
makes things much easier to use. Thanks,
David
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6
On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 07:17:38PM +1000, David Findlay wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Is there a particular reason why Supermount couldn't be included in the
debian unstable kernels as an option? It works brilliantly on Mandrake, and
makes things much easier to use
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 15 Apr 2002 19:25, David Odin wrote:
On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 07:17:38PM +1000, David Findlay wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Is there a particular reason why Supermount couldn't be included in the
debian
Is there a particular reason why Supermount couldn't be included in the
debian unstable kernels as an option? It works brilliantly on Mandrake,
and makes things much easier to use. Thanks,
Please, no!
Supermount has a lots of problems if you're not alone on your system,
and most of its features
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 15 Apr 2002 20:06, David Odin wrote:
Automount will mount the medium as soon as you access it. I fail to see
any use of mounting a medium when it is put, and before it is accessed.
The medium will be unmounted after a 'user defined' time.
On Mon, 15 Apr 2002, David Findlay wrote:
Well can the debconf for automount please make it easy to configure it that
way? The default config doesn't do anything like it, and the documentation is
not clear on setting it up. Everyone runs around saying they want to make
Debian easy for the new
On Mon, 15 Apr 2002, David Findlay wrote:
On Mon, 15 Apr 2002 21:31, T.Pospisek's MailLists wrote:
On Mon, 15 Apr 2002, David Findlay wrote:
Well can the debconf for automount please make it easy to configure it
that way? The default config doesn't do anything like it, and the
On Mon, 2002-04-15 at 05:17, David Findlay wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Is there a particular reason why Supermount couldn't be included in the
debian unstable kernels as an option? It works brilliantly on Mandrake, and
makes things much easier to use. Thanks
On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 12:06:23PM +0200, David Odin wrote:
Supermount is a very bad hack, and as the problem of letting a user
'lock' a removable medium, if it is superunmounted when still in use.
This flaw is notable, unfortunately. However, this is a matter of
permissions really. If only
On Mon, 15 Apr 2002, Joseph Carter wrote:
On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 12:06:23PM +0200, David Odin wrote:
The way of acting is the same as supermount, but it won't let you do
stupid thing such as ejecting a medium in use.
Depending on what use means it's not the user that is stupid
Le lun 15/04/2002 à 12:32, David Findlay a écrit :
Well can the debconf for automount please make it easy to configure it that
way? The default config doesn't do anything like it, and the documentation is
not clear on setting it up. Everyone runs around saying they want to make
Debian easy
On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 07:54:48PM +0200, Tomas Pospisek's Mailing Lists wrote:
On Mon, 15 Apr 2002, Joseph Carter wrote:
On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 12:06:23PM +0200, David Odin wrote:
The way of acting is the same as supermount, but it won't let you do
stupid thing such as ejecting
On Mon, 2002-04-15 at 16:54, David Odin wrote:
Well, the main problem I have with supermount and not have with
automount is the following:
I'm a CS teacher, and the linux distribution in the computer room is
mandrake. And, very often, a student use supermount to mount a floppy,
do some
On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 05:12:26PM -0400, Sean Middleditch wrote:
On Mon, 2002-04-15 at 16:54, David Odin wrote:
Well, the main problem I have with supermount and not have with
automount is the following:
I'm a CS teacher, and the linux distribution in the computer room is
mandrake
On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 11:27:15PM +0200, David Odin wrote:
On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 05:12:26PM -0400, Sean Middleditch wrote:
On Mon, 2002-04-15 at 16:54, David Odin wrote:
Well, the main problem I have with supermount and not have with
automount is the following:
I'm a CS teacher
seconds, so at most, I'll have to wait 5 seconds between the last time I
access the medium and the moment I want to eject the medium.
I cannot get nautilus or gmc to work well with automount... will they
work with supermount? I'd be willing to try this stuff if so...
[]s!
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED
around with it for a
while. I think it would be a good idea if people here could heavily
test the supermount patch.
Thank you, P. *8^)
I've been using Stephen's supermount patches since before their
official release (he wrote them while we were working
24 matches
Mail list logo
