On 18 Aug 2001 01:02:53 -0400, David Walluck wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Aug 2001, Alexander Skwar wrote:
>
> > But overall, I *completely* agree with you. I also fail to see the
> > benefit of supermount - I suppose because of "ignorance", just like you
> > are :)
>
> Well, show me how to use it maybe
So sprach »Pixel« am 2001-08-17 um 22:52:52 +0200 :
> With autofs, you can put a very low unmounting timeout. But in that case you
> loose the buffer, everytime you access a file, it must read again as it was
> unmounted.
Is supermount different?
Alexander Skwar
--
How to quote: http://learn.
David Walluck wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Aug 2001, Alexander Skwar wrote:
>
>
>>But overall, I *completely* agree with you. I also fail to see the
>>benefit of supermount - I suppose because of "ignorance", just like you
>>are :)
>>
>
> Well, show me how to use it maybe? :) I know my automount tries
On Fri, 17 Aug 2001, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> But overall, I *completely* agree with you. I also fail to see the
> benefit of supermount - I suppose because of "ignorance", just like you
> are :)
Well, show me how to use it maybe? :) I know my automount tries to contact
and LDAP server and then
Pixel wrote:
>
> Alexander Skwar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > The only issue I see, is that with autofs the mountpoints are not
> > visible. That is, you go to /auto (or wherever) and do a ls, and you
>
> i don't really know either, but here is what i think:
>
> With autofs, you can put
Alexander Skwar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The only issue I see, is that with autofs the mountpoints are not
> visible. That is, you go to /auto (or wherever) and do a ls, and you
i don't really know either, but here is what i think:
With autofs, you can put a very low unmounting timeout. B
So sprach »Frederik Himpe« am 2001-08-17 um 17:10:38 +0200 :
> Because supermount is not available for some time, I decided to give
> autofs a try. It works great at first sight. Why in fact does Mandrake
> makes so much effort in adapting supermount to the new kernels, when
> autofs already works
Because supermount is not available for some time, I decided to give
autofs a try. It works great at first sight. Why in fact does Mandrake
makes so much effort in adapting supermount to the new kernels, when
autofs already works great? Is there an important difference I don't see
at this moment?
On 13 May 2001 21:44:45 +0400, Andrej Borsenkow wrote:
> /mnt/cdrom is not visible unless mounted. It means, that such things as
> completion, browsing in Konqueror (or probably any file manager for that
> matter) simply do not work - /mnt appears empty.
i handled this by adding a link to the m
I have tried to convert my supermount to autofs. The result was at least
one disatvantage of autofs - you cannot browse mount points. I mean, in
the case
auto.mater:
/mnt auto.mnt
auto.mnt:
cdrom -fstype=iso9660,... :/dev/cdrom
/mnt/cdrom is not visible unless mounted. It means, that such thin
10 matches
Mail list logo
