On Thu, Jun 13, 2002 at 01:22:07PM +0800, Dan Jacobson wrote:
> mount: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /dev/hda1,
> or too many mounted file systems
>
> Can't this message be refined a little? Is there really no way to
> tell the user a slightly more informative answer?
No. Basically, mount asks the kernel to mount something, and the kernel
says "didn't work". So mount, being helpful, gives you a list of things
that could have gone wrong.
So mount *is* trying to be informative. I suspect you would not have
bothered to post if mount had simply answered answered "failed". Making
mount give the exact reason for a failure would mean changing the kernel
interface.
There have been long threads and even flamewars about this. See the
archives if you are interested.
> If someone feels this is important please file a bug for me. I am not
> ready to report bugs yet.
If you do file a bug (and I recommend you don't) then file it against
the kernel.
Florian
--
Ben> I don't think anybody has done a Intercal machine yet, since Intercal is
Ben> not exactly the #1 langauge to program in.
Paul> Intel has one, but few seem to want to buy it for some odd reason.
-- Ben Franchuk and Paul Repacholi in comp.sys.dec (2002)
Attachment:
pgpggrpsz6AHn.pgp
Description: PGP signature