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

Christopher Faylor
Wed May 13 17:26:00 GMT 2009

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.
>> 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.


More information about the Cygwin-developers mailing list