[HEADSUP] Let's start a Cygwin 1.7 release area

Christopher Faylor cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please@cygwin.com
Sat Apr 5 19:38:00 GMT 2008


On Sat, Apr 05, 2008 at 08:30:09PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On Apr  5 13:38, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Sat, Apr 05, 2008 at 12:08:34PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> >On Apr  4 14:22, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> >- All mount points in /etc/fstab are system mount points by default,
>> >  all other mount points are always user mount points.  The important
>> >  thing here is, that user mount points can't override system mount
>> >  points anymore.  If you try that, you get an EPERM error.  The reason
>> >  for this change is to allow sysadmins to specify paths in /etc/fstab
>> >  which no user is allowed to screw up.  Paths which the user may
>> >  umount or re-mount can be marked as user mounts by the admin.
>> 
>> I don't believe that linux acts like this with user mounts.
>
>It doesn't.  I didn't try to do exaclty what Linux does, but to implement
>a concept which makes sense on Cygwin while coming at least close to
>Linux.

But this philosophy doesn't really jive with what you are saying below.
You are changing behavior and you're changing it away from the way
cygwin used to work and even away from the way linux works now.

>> >- The flags string in the fstab file also understands the flags "system"
>> >  and "user" now, to allow the sysadmin to specify default paths which a
>> >  user may change.
>> 
>> When implementing something like this can't we just try to use prior
>> art?  linux has the concept of a "user" mount but it is not the default
>
>And it's not on Cygwin.  The default is "system".
>
>> and, I think that the inverse of user would be "nouser", not "system".
>
>Well, the prior art I used was our own mount(1) which is using these
>options for a couple of years.  I don't care to name the system mounts
>now nouser mounts in /etc/fstab, especially given that you don't have to
>use this option at all, but actually I think we will not get rid of
>the term system mount for a couple of years.  At least not in the cygwin
>mailing lists.  And probably not in my head, either ;)

You are picking and choosing where to draw the line.  /etc/fstab will
REALLY confuse people who are used to modifying the registry directly
despite years of telling people not to do that.  I wasn't suggesting
that we put a bunch of "nouser"s in /etc/fstab.  I was suggesting that
nouser is the default and that "system" isn't needed because that's
really what is implied by a mount.

There are a lot of notions that were developed in the early days of
cygwin that I have come to see as ill-advised and the notion of a
"system" mount is one of them.

cgf



More information about the Cygwin-developers mailing list