Re: [autofs] Help with automounting from a LDAP server

Wed, 12 Jan 2005 07:49:15 -0800 

On Tue, 11 Jan 2005, abo wrote:

sorry about this newbie question, but can you explain what exactly
direct mounts/maps is?


That's a little difficult but ...

An example of an indirect map might be:

in the master map

/home   /etc/auto.indirect

and auto.indirect might have

user1   server1:/home/userdir1
user2   server1:/home/userdir2
....

An example of a direct map might be:

/-      /etc/auto.direct

and in auto.direct might have

/nfs/apps/geoapp1       server1:/apps/geoapplication
/nfs/apps/geoapp2       server2:/apps/application2
/nfs/data/mydata        data1:/data/north/mydata
/global/data/theirdata  other:/data/test
...

Direct mount maps always have /- in the master map whereas indirect maps always have their base directory.
Direct mount keys are always full paths wheras in an indirect mount the key is always a single directory component.

You can't have nested mounts in a direct map either.

Check out Managing NFS and NIS 2nd edition, O'Reilly, chapter 13.


thx


On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 16:39:40 +0800 (WST)
Ian Kent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

On Tue, 11 Jan 2005, Krishnakumar B wrote:

Can't do that at present. Direct mounts are not fully
implemented. 

My manpage for autofs(5) claims the following:

UNSUPPORTED
       This version of the automounter supports direct maps for
FILE, NIS
and LDAP maps only and handles SunOS-style replicated
filesystems
only to the extent that mount(8) does. 

Perhaps I need to change this to be more accurate.


So is my manpage wrong, or does "direct maps" mean something other
than
"direct mounts"? Or are you referring to the following limitation
(from 
README.direct v1.3).

NOTE: Due to current design limitations, direct maps will take over
an
entire directory hierarchy. What this means is, if your direct map
key is
/usr/share/bilbo, then /usr will become an automount mount point,
mounting
over the existing /usr. 

I'm refering to the design limitation mentioned in this note.

This will continue to be the case in 4.1.4 (in fact 4.1.x).

I plan on creating a 4.2.0 development branch at some point fairly
soon. 
This will be the top priority for that development.

Ian

_______________________________________________
autofs mailing list
[email protected]
http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/autofs


_______________________________________________
autofs mailing list
[email protected]
http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/autofs


_______________________________________________
autofs mailing list
[email protected]
http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/autofs

Reply via email to