More: [1.7] packaging problem? Both /usr/bin/ and /usr/lib/ are non-empty

Corinna Vinschen
Wed May 13 17:20:00 GMT 2009

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.


> 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.


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