/cdrom

Is there a good reason to not ship
1) the directory /cdrom
2) an entry for it in fstab (from
share/examples/.../*cdrom*)
?

I'm testing the i386pkg CD right now, and funny enough,
getting the cdrom 
mounted seems the most difficult step to a working system.
Which I think 
we can overcome easily. The patch appended below does this.

Any objections to commit?


  - Hubert

Index: disks.c
============================================================
=======
RCS file: /cvsroot/src/distrib/utils/sysinst/disks.c,v
retrieving revision 1.96
diff -u -r1.96 disks.c
--- disks.c	18 Jun 2007 16:58:42 -0000	1.96
+++ disks.c	26 Oct 2007 18:35:14 -0000
 -501,9
+501,11 
  	scripting_fprintf(f,
"kernfstt/kerntkernfstrwn");
  	scripting_fprintf(f,
"ptyfstt/dev/ptstptyfstrwn");
  	scripting_fprintf(f,
"procfstt/proctprocfstrw,noauton");
+	scripting_fprintf(f,
"/dev/cd0att/cdromtcd9660tro,noauton");
  	make_target_dir("/kern");
  	make_target_dir("/proc");
  	make_target_dir("/dev/pts");
+	make_target_dir("/cdrom");

  	scripting_fprintf(NULL, "EOFn");

On Fri, Oct 26, 2007 at 08:35:53PM +0200, Hubert Feyrer
wrote:
> Any objections to commit?

No objections from me - but should we do a duplicate for
/dvd using
udf instead of cd9660? I found a few udf-only dvds
recently.

Martin

On Fri, Oct 26, 2007 at 08:35:53PM +0200, Hubert Feyrer
wrote:
> 
> Is there a good reason to not ship
> 1) the directory /cdrom
> 2) an entry for it in fstab (from
share/examples/.../*cdrom*)
> ?
> 
> I'm testing the i386pkg CD right now, and funny enough,
getting the cdrom 
> mounted seems the most difficult step to a working
system. Which I think 
> we can overcome easily. The patch appended below does
this.
> 
> Any objections to commit?

I would prefer using /mnt/cdrom instead of creating another
top-level
directory. Especially as there might be more such
mountpoints to be
added (dvd, floppy).

Pavel

On Sat, 27 Oct 2007, Pavel Cahyna wrote:
> I would prefer using /mnt/cdrom instead of creating
another top-level
> directory. Especially as there might be more such
mountpoints to be
> added (dvd, floppy).

This would contradict hier(7), and my proposal does not
focus on that.


  - Hubert

On Sat, Oct 27, 2007 at 12:56:15PM +0200, Hubert Feyrer
wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Oct 2007, Pavel Cahyna wrote:
> >I would prefer using /mnt/cdrom instead of creating
another top-level
> >directory. Especially as there might be more such
mountpoints to be
> >added (dvd, floppy).
> 
> This would contradict hier(7), and my proposal does not
focus on that.

Ah, ok. What about introducing /media according to the FHS,
then?
It says: "Historically there have been a number of
other different places
used to mount removeable media such as /cdrom, /mnt or
/mnt/cdrom.
Placing the mount points for all removeable media directly
in the root
directory would potentially result in a large number of
extra
directories in /."
(http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#MEDIAMO
UNTPOINT)

Pavel

On Sat, 27 Oct 2007, Pavel Cahyna wrote:
>> This would contradict hier(7), and my proposal does
not focus on that.
>
> Ah, ok. What about introducing /media according to the
FHS, then?
> It says: "Historically there have been a number of
other different places
> used to mount removeable media such as /cdrom, /mnt or
/mnt/cdrom.
> Placing the mount points for all removeable media
directly in the root
> directory would potentially result in a large number of
extra
> directories in /."
> (http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#MEDIAMO
UNTPOINT)

The current suggestion was modeled after Solaris, which
we've used as a 
role model in the past.

For something like /media or another more general scheme,
I'd suggest to 
defer this discussion until we get something like a HAL/dbus

infrastructure, and then think again on this whole thing.

For now, I'd like to stick to the KISS principle.


  - Hubert

Pavel Cahyna wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 27, 2007 at 12:56:15PM +0200, Hubert Feyrer
wrote:
>   
>> On Sat, 27 Oct 2007, Pavel Cahyna wrote:
>>     
>>> I would prefer using /mnt/cdrom instead of
creating another top-level
>>> directory. Especially as there might be more
such mountpoints to be
>>> added (dvd, floppy).
>>>       
>> This would contradict hier(7), and my proposal does
not focus on that.
>>     
>
> Ah, ok. What about introducing /media according to the
FHS, then?
> It says: "Historically there have been a number of
other different places
> used to mount removeable media such as /cdrom, /mnt or
/mnt/cdrom.
> Placing the mount points for all removeable media
directly in the root
> directory would potentially result in a large number of
extra
> directories in /."
> (http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#MEDIAMO
UNTPOINT)
>
> Pavel
>   

Any reason not to setup an amd config for these directories?
 ("too much 
more complicated than /etc/fstab"?)
If we want to make things convinient, "cd /cdrom"
is certainly easier 
than "mount /cdrom; cd /cdrow; ...; umount
/cdrom"

eric