This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-developers
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: More: [1.7] packaging problem? Both /usr/bin/ and /usr/lib/ are non-empty
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 07:20:00PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On May 13 13:10, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 06:36:05PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> >On May 13 12:15, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> >>But, regarding, "mount -m": It looks like more mount work is required
>> >>there since we don't want mount -m to generate mount commands that will
>> >>fail (as in the case of root) or to force a mount of /usr/lib when it
>> >>isn't necessary. The ",auto" would be a nice clue about that. We
>> >>could just have mount ignore that option like linux's mount does with
>> >>some options that show up in its mount output.
>> >
>> >Ok, sure. Are you going to do that?
>>
>> Yes. Trivial change.
>
>Cool.
>
>> I added "immutable" and "auto" as no-op options for the mount command
>> too but would you rather not see immutable at all? Or, mount could
>> actually implement it and allow it on any old random mount.
>
>Well, hmm. Right now I think I could very well live without a visible
>immutable flag.
I was thinking about this from a supportability (superiority?) point of
view. If someone says "Wah! I can't mount root!" we can smugly point
them to the output of the "mount" command.
But, I'll remove it if you don't like it. We can always add it later.
cgf