[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: /mnt/cdrom or /mnt ?



On Wed, Mar 31, 1999 at 06:51:08AM +0100, Martin Keegan wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Mar 1999, Seva wrote:
> > Keep the / as clean as possible,
> Hear, hear; but this isn't the way to go about it.
>  
> > /mnt/tmp	temp (what uses to be /mnt)
> I think we can agree that the days of /mnt being use as a temporary mount
> point, rather than as a directory containing mountpoints are over. 

Ummm. Why is this an issue for either the LSB or the FHS?

It seems to me that whether /cdrom or /mnt/cdrom is used should be up to
the user and/or vendor. I know I *personally* would rather not have to
type the extra four characters. And, no, I don't find my / directory is
overfull. YMMV, of course.

> My question about this lot is: whose problem are you trying to solve? The
> newbie isn't going to benefit from /mnt/loop, /mnt/tmp, etc, and the
> experienced user isn't going to tolerate /mnt/remote for all those
> different NFS mountpoints. /mnt/win breaks the moment you have multiple
> windows partitions.

Further, the vendors are already happy with what they've respectively
got, the sysadmin can presumably change it to suit their needs anyway,
and third party vendors shouldn't need to know where I mount my DOS
drives (which, FWIW, is usually /dos/c, /dos/d, etc), or, ideally,
whether or not I have the CD-ROM mounted locally, or copied onto an NFS
mounted fileserver.

So whose problem *are* we trying to solve?

Cheers,
aj, who thinks everyone's PS1 should be "[\u@\h \w]\$ ", but doesn't think
    the LSB should be standardising on it.

-- 
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. PGP encrypted mail preferred.

``Like the ski resort of girls looking for husbands and husbands looking
  for girls, the situation is not as symmetrical as it might seem.''

Attachment: pgprdyw0RqEsW.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: