On Sat 29 Oct 2016 at 18:48:11 +0300, Reco wrote: > On Sat, 29 Oct 2016 15:09:09 +0100 > Brian <a...@cityscape.co.uk> wrote: > > > On Sat 29 Oct 2016 at 15:54:59 +0300, Reco wrote: > > > > > On Sat, 29 Oct 2016 08:16:18 -0400 > > > rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > I'll say that the wiki page gave no hint as to which of the three > > > > options to > > > > install, or any hint that one might work better than another. > > > > > > The page is describing 'Producing an automated install of a Debian > > > operating system from a USB stick', to quote it. For such an advanced > > > task it can be safely assumed IMO that the person who's implementing the > > > instruction is familiar with the basic concepts of a 'file system' or > > > 'mounting'. > > > > The question of providing guidance on which of the three tools to use is > > an interesting one. As far as possible a wiki page like this one should > > stick to facts and technical matters; venturing into the area of opinion > > isn't the way to go, IMO. Do any of these tools have a distinct > > technical advantage for the purpose of installing GRUB is the question > > to ask and answer? If the answer is "no" don't they deserve equal > > exposure? > > No advantage that I'm aware of. In fact, the whole paragraph could be > shortened to already existing text: > > If you are working within one of the desktop environments it is very > likely the mounting can be done from he file manager which comes with > it. This is because udisks2 will be on the system. A label will > possibly be used for the mount point.
I wish you had addressed the "equal exposure" question. Desktops are not the only environments in town. Leaving non-policykit users out in the cold is not an option. > > The tools exist and all can be assumed to work. The choice of which one > > to use is up to the user. For many users a couple of clicks on a desktop > > will get the stick mounted; others might like the challenge of using a > > new tool. > > My point exactly. Why bother naming all these tools if it all comes down > to "you might use your file manager to do this part for you as well"? It doesn't come down to that; using a desktop filemanager is just one of the alternatives. One could equally well ask why it is has to mentioned when there is > Install pmount, udevil or udisks2 and use one ..... Providing a range of advice for a range of people isn't exactly easy in all situations. Advice on installing a wifi kernel module is easy - there is only one for each chipset. A page on pmount is a little harder because it is a moving target. (The link you gave has out-of-date info on HAL). Anything more complex can always be criticised as time moves on. But your sort of constructive criticism is valuable. > > A few might say - "Hey, interesting, never knew about that; > > I'll give it a go". And then go on to use it in another context. > > True, but why stop here? Author(s?) of the page might mention usbmount > and supermount as well. You are getting carried away here. Both are for *automatically* mounting and unmounting removable media, which is not a focus for the task. There is no sign of supermount in stable or unstable. > > > It can be argued (again IMO) that the 3 tools proposed are not the best > > > ones available for the task, or downright redundant due to availability > > > of mount(8), but all three mentioned tools are in fact are links to [2]. > > > Broken ones (for me at least), but they are links to manpages for the > > > mentioned tools. Surely a manpage can be viewed as a suitable source of > > > hints you're referring to. > > > > mount is a root-only tool; the others aren't. Need I say more? > > Yes, I believe you do. As little as possible should be done as root is a good principle. > The page mentions 'Check the mount point from within the fie manager or > with the command "mount"' (curious typo btw), rightfully assuming that > one does not need to be root to do that. C'mon; pointing out a typo! This is unworthy of you, even as an aside. > The bottom of the page mentions at least one operation that needs to be > performed as root, so why exactly mounting USB stick as root is somehow > a bad thing in this context? Excellent point. This will lead to a rewriting. The problem at the time was that Wheezy and Jessie behaved differently. It is mentioned (bug #751892) that root may be necessary. Now Wheezy is unsupported references to it can go. > > The Debian manpages site is broken and awaiting relocation to a new > > host. > > Here I can only assume that this useful service was available at the > time that page was written. Good thinking, Batman. :) > > > > Of course, > > > > until this issue came up, no one may have expected one to work better > > > > than > > > > another, so then someone reading that page could, quite appropriately, > > > > try one > > > > and not the others, and assume that there was no more useful > > > > information on > > > > the page. > > > > > > I agree that the page provides unnecessary choice in this regard, and > > > for the sake of clarity of this topic [3] would be more appropriate. > > > > Fair enough. But why not udisks2? After all, it will already be on many > > machines. > > No reason, really. pmount was mentioned first on the page. Mounting and unmounting are not really a problem. Users and root can easily do these. But, as far as I can see, only someone with root privileges can use dd, cfdisk, fdisk and mkfs.vfat with a removable device. I'd like to be wrong. -- Brian.