On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 06:39:13PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Dec 18, GOTO Masanori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >OK, I would like to rename from /etc/init.d/devpts.sh to
> >/etc/init.d/mountfs, because (1) for example there is mountnfs which
> >mounts nfs (2) umountfs in initscripts un-
On Dec 18, GOTO Masanori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>OK, I would like to rename from /etc/init.d/devpts.sh to
>/etc/init.d/mountfs, because (1) for example there is mountnfs which
>mounts nfs (2) umountfs in initscripts un-mounts filesystems, so
>"mountfs" makes a name pair. Any comments?
Loo
Hi!
On 2003-12-18 22:06 +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote:
> > What about /etc/init.d/kernfs or mountkernfs?
>
> OK, I would like to rename from /etc/init.d/devpts.sh to
> /etc/init.d/mountfs, because (1) for example there is mountnfs which
> mounts nfs (2) umountfs in initscripts un-mounts filesystems,
At Mon, 15 Dec 2003 11:11:18 +0100,
Martin Pitt wrote:
> On 2003-12-15 10:04 +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote:
> > >From the view point of libc6 maintainer, it's no problem to merge /sys
> > mount for /etc/init.d/devpts.sh. The name of devpts.sh should be
> > renamed to something, though. And it can be
On Dec 15, GOTO Masanori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>From the view point of libc6 maintainer, it's no problem to merge /sys
>mount for /etc/init.d/devpts.sh. The name of devpts.sh should be
>renamed to something, though. And it can be also applied for /dev/shm
>tmpfs.
Another reason is that
Hi!
On 2003-12-15 10:04 +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote:
> >From the view point of libc6 maintainer, it's no problem to merge /sys
> mount for /etc/init.d/devpts.sh. The name of devpts.sh should be
> renamed to something, though. And it can be also applied for /dev/shm
> tmpfs.
That sounds reasonabl
At Sun, 14 Dec 2003 22:01:42 +0100,
Marco d'Itri wrote:
> [1 ]
> On Dec 14, Martin Pitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> udev (and given time many other programs) needs sysfs mounted, so we
> >> should decide if it will be handled by devpts.sh or by a similar script
> >> in a different packag
On Dec 14, Martin Pitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> udev (and given time many other programs) needs sysfs mounted, so we
>> should decide if it will be handled by devpts.sh or by a similar script
>> in a different package.
>> Currently the udev init script[1] mounts it by itself, but I'd like
Hi Marco and all others!
On 2003-12-14 3:01 +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Dec 13, Andreas Metzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >I would propose to handle this similarily to the devpts
> >filesystem i.e. by a init-script instead of cluttering fstab.
> Agreed. This also solves the problem of
9 matches
Mail list logo
