Translating, this should really be an English discussion for the interested developer who doesn't speak Polish.
On Tue, 2005-01-04 at 17:26 +0100, Witold Krecicki wrote: > Dnia wtorek 04 styczeń 2005 16:53, Adam Gołębiowski napisał: > > On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 04:26:22PM +0100, Paweł Gołaszewski wrote: > > > On Tue, 4 Jan 2005, Charles wrote: > > > > > +%pre > > > > > +# on target system the /boot might not be mounted (it's not required > > > > > for system +# to run properly), it could be also mounted ro > > > > > +mount /boot >/dev/null 2>&1 > > > > > +mount /boot -o remount,rw >/dev/null 2>&1 > > > > > +exit 0 > > > > > > > > I don't believe it's the best solution. Automatically mount > > > > disks/partitions in an rpm session? > > > > > > Especially because if I do have it unmounted... that's for a > > > reason. And that state should be retained after rpm's operation > > > (meaning, if it's not mounted, it should be unmounted after > > > installation) > > > > Is is possible to pass some value from %pre to %post? There's no > > problem then - in %pre invoke grep twice (for /etc/fstab > > and /proc/mounts) and we know if we're actually going to > > mount /boot and should unmount it in %post. > It would also be useful to detect 'noauto' - somebody might not want > to use /boot (even though it's in fstab). And the system should be > installed on the system as it is - among others with the partitions > mounted. IMHO the solution is mistaken, at the least. -- Paweł Sakowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PLD Linux Distribution _______________________________________________ pld-devel-en mailing list [email protected] http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
