On Mon, 2002-04-15 at 05:17, David Findlay wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> Is there a particular reason why Supermount couldn't be included in the
> debian unstable kernels as an option? It works brilliantly on Mandrake, and
> makes things much easier to use. Thanks,
Supermount is horrendously unstable. Of all the hard kernel crashes
I've ever had (like, say, 4?, not counting the non-Linux friendly
laptops...) 3 were caused by supermount.
I'd say you hack on Supermount and stabilize the hell out of it. Also,
perhaps kernel 2.6/3.0 will have this kind of functionality as is, since
everything will supposedly be hot-swappable - and I don't see why
"hot-swappable" CD-ROM's and floppies can't be done.
And, in response to the other posters on this thread, automount does
*not* provide equivalent functionality. First, because it doesn't take
time to unmount. Second, because of the mounting/unmounting, it
provides an excess amount of time waiting for media to be mounted.
Third, it doesn't let you eject while it's in use, which is actually a
problem, because sometimes you *need* to eject while in use. If umount
had an option (even as root) to unmount/eject when in use, then there
wouldn't be a problem. But when a process goes into disk sleep mode,
and never comes out of it, on a CD that other apps read just fine, and
you can't eject the CD without rebooting the entire
server/workstation... well, it sucks, to say the least.
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to firstname.lastname@example.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to firstname.lastname@example.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com
- From: David Findlay <firstname.lastname@example.org>