Re: Debian, FHS & /floppy
On Tuesday 15 January 2002 02:06 am, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Andras Simonyi <simka@ludens.elte.hu> [2002.01.14.1733 +0100]:
> > I can't help asking this concerning Debian's FHS compliance: why on
> > earth make all the Debian-versions the mount-points of removable media
> > in the root directory instead of /mnt/, which is the required standard
> > in FHS? Of course I can change /cdrom and /floppy to /mnt/cdrom etc, but
> > then I have to change various config files as well (eg. for apt to
> > work).
>
> i consider /mnt/{cdrom,floppy} a redhat sickness. first of all, please
> show me where the FHS supposedly dictates those two mount points into
> /mnt?
>
> then, look at section 3.11:
> "/mnt : Mount point for a temporarily mounted filesystem"
>
> and that's exactly what it's for. so you can mount a filesystem
> temporarily. you could still do that if you had /mnt/{cdrom,floppy}, but
> when a temp filesystem is mounted, you couldn't access either of the
> media, and you might even have troubles mounting on /mnt if a
> subdirectory is already used as a mountpoint.
>
> /mnt/{cdrom,floppy} are actually offending the FHS. the FHS has not
> specific path for them, but /floppy and /cdrom strike me as the best and
> most logical. i should talk to the team and have them add that...
>
> what do others think?
i agree. it was one of the pleasures of discovering debian to find that
something i had always considered redundant was not employed in the debian
filesystem. why shouldn't floppies and other removable media be visible at
the root level? the fact that they are removable doesn't necessarily make
them less significant than anything else. while /mnt/floppy, etc., may have
acquired some acceptance as a standard simply through popular habit, to say
that this implies a "required" standard is ridiculous--required by whom? i've
never used /mnt/floppy on any system i've ever had, from slack, through
freebsd, to suse, and i've never suffered by that choice. there is no
requirement for it by any authority or standard.
Reply to: