Re: /mnt/cdrom or /mnt ?
On Tue, 30 Mar 1999 keld@dkuug.dk wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 30, 1999 at 01:30:25PM +0200, Jochem Huhmann wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > there seems to be some confusion right now if temporary mounts (of
> > changable media like CD's) should use /mnt/something or /something.
> >
> > Debian uses /cdrom, which is also hardcoded in apt-get. Solaris also
> > uses /cdrom. Redhat uses /mnt/cdrom. I've always had the impression that
> > /mnt is the right place for such mounts, since cluttering / with this
> > (think of /cdrom, /cdrw, /floppy, /jazz, /zip, /dvd ...) is ugly at
> > least.
> >
> > Should the LSB take care of this? The FHS seems to be quite sloppy on
> > this item.
>
> I think this is a question for LSB. Also I think naming of Windows
> partitions should be an issue for LSB. This is one of the main
> obstacles for new Linux users - when installing Linux.
>
> IMHO, both /cdrom and /win should go into the root directory.
>
> Keld
No, this is an FHS issue as opposed to an LSB issue, since it deals with
the placement of files/directories. Personally, I would prefer it to be
directories under /mnt. The / directory should be kept as clean as
possible. If every device that isn't somewhare else in the file system is
to be mounted in a subdirectory of /, then / will get real messy really
quick.
+-----------------------+-----------------------------+--------------------+
| Jakob 'sparky' Kaivo | jkaivo@nodomainname.net | jkaivo@ndn.net |
| NoDomainName Networks | http://www.nodomainname.net | http://www.ndn.net |
+-----------------------+-----------------------------+ whois jkk12 |
| Thanks to advances in shortness, I have updated my +--------------------+
| ~/.signature. Note that nodomainname can now be replaced with just ndn. |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Reply to: