Re: /mnt/cdrom or /mnt ?

To: lsb-discuss@lists.linuxbase.org
Subject: Re: /mnt/cdrom or /mnt ?
From: Michael Stone <mstone@cs.loyola.edu>
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 06:20:36 -0500
Message-id: <[🔎] 19990331062036.Q31660@justice.loyola.edu>
Mail-followup-to: lsb-discuss@lists.linuxbase.org
In-reply-to: <[🔎] Pine.LNX.3.96.990331062049.24204B-100000@oh.jesus.cam.ac.uk>; from Martin Keegan on Wed, Mar 31, 1999 at 06:51:08AM +0100
References: <[🔎] Pine.LNX.4.10.9903301820540.18320-100000@null.cc.uic.edu> <[🔎] Pine.LNX.3.96.990331062049.24204B-100000@oh.jesus.cam.ac.uk>

On Wed, Mar 31, 1999 at 06:51:08AM +0100, Martin Keegan wrote:
> 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. 

I don't think that...

Mike Stone

Reply to:

References:
- Re: /mnt/cdrom or /mnt ?
  - From: Seva <seva@null.cc.uic.edu>
- Re: /mnt/cdrom or /mnt ?
  - From: Martin Keegan <mk270@cam.ac.uk>

Prev by Date: Re: FHS & /cdrom
Next by Date: Re: /mnt/cdrom or /mnt ?
Previous by thread: Re: /mnt/cdrom or /mnt ?
Next by thread: Re: /mnt/cdrom or /mnt ?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread