On Wed, 2006-06-07 at 09:43 -0400, David Zeuthen wrote: > On Wed, 2006-06-07 at 14:51 +0200, Xavier Claessens wrote: > > > I don't really follow your reasoning fully. I agree that users want to > > > see their OSX and/or windows mounts from linux, but I think you > > > over-empasize the "single user, dual boot, home desktop" usecase. In the > > > case of more traditional sysadmined unix setups (at universities and > > > whatnot) you'll have a bunch of bizzare mountpoints (nfs mounts, autofs > > > mounts, tmpfs, /usr, /home, extra drives/partitions, etc). > > > > > > If we were to show all these, then I think things would look pretty > > > confusing. I really think we need to hide a bunch of mountpoints. Some > > > mountpoints can probably be hardcoded > > > (like /proc, /tmp/, /home, /opt/*, /usr, and /boot), but we can never > > > think of all possibilities, so we should probably have a way to mark > > > them. > > Yea, of course we should hide such bizarre mount points. My point was > merely we ought to show drives/mounts even if the user is not privileged > to mount them. > > > > > > > > We should only display "/media/*" and "/mnt/*" > > Yup, that's one option, maybe just resort to showing entries from /media > then alexl's /mnt/hdb1 drive won't be shown (and if alexl wants it to be > shown he can move the mount point to /media). Personally I think we > should just hide all the directories and subdirs as defined by FHS2.3. > We do that here > > http://cvs.gnome.org/viewcvs/gnome-vfs/libgnomevfs/gnome-vfs-hal-mounts.c?view=markup > > in function _hal_volume_policy_check() though I'm unsure whether this > code is used at the moment (will look into that).
Well, the bug report: http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=341446 showed drives for things like / and /home. So something is going wrong here. I see a _hal_drive_policy_check that is empty though. Anyway, what i think we should do is: Have a policy for what mountpoints to create drives for. Be it by blacklisting or whitelisting. If the policy says the mountpoint shouldn't have a drive then we don't even create one. Set is_user_visible to false on drives that support auto-mounting, so we can hide them everywhere but in computer:///. I think blacklisting will probably work well enough, but you probably need to add more stuff than just the toplevel FHS mountpoints, for instance /dev/shmem and common non-linux mountpoints. Also, it looks like you create drives based on currently mounted volumes that are not in fstab? This will generate a bunch of drives when using things like autofs for separate /home/<user> mountpoints and cause things like /proc/bus/usb to get drives. Does it ever make sense to create a drive object for a volume like this? It'll only live as long as the volume and you can't really use it for anything. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Alexander Larsson Red Hat, Inc [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] He's a time-tossed coffee-fuelled inventor on his last day in the job. She's a warm-hearted mutant research scientist from a different time and place. They fight crime! _______________________________________________ gnome-vfs-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-vfs-list
