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

Corinna Vinschen corinna-cygwin@cygwin.com
Sun Apr 6 09:57:00 GMT 2008

On Apr  5 15:38, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 05, 2008 at 08:30:09PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >On Apr  5 13:38, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> >> 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.

Sorry, but you lost me here.  I don't understand what "nouser" instead
of "system" is other than a change of a term.  `man mount' on Linux says

  nouser Forbid an ordinary (i.e., non-root) user to mount the file
         system.  This is the default.

So that's how I implemented the "system" mount now.  I just changed that
to "nouser" in CVS and I also changed the postinstall script
accordingly, but, am I missing something?  Is there something else
besides the term change?

So, using the new terminology, "nouser" mount points are the default,
unless you specify "user", and the user can't change the mount point.

"user" mount points are not exactly as on Linux, because in contrast to
Linux we don't have a need to have dynamic mount points like, say, for a
DVD drive.  There is still the concept that the user can mount arbitrary
Windows paths to a POSIX path which is what we call user mount points so
far.  That's not a necessary concept in a home office, where the user
typically has full control over the machine anyway.  But the concept
still makes sense in a commercial environment.  That's why I'm reluctant
to remove the fstab.$USER stuff.  Calling "mount" in /etc/profile
doesn't catch it, because it disallows user specific mounts when calling
Cygwin tools directory from cmd.exe or any other non-Cygwin process.
So, "user" mounts are not as on Linux, but the concept is not *that* far


Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader          cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

More information about the Cygwin-developers mailing list