Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2016 22:20:23 +0200 From: Edward Tomasz =?utf-8?Q?Napiera=C5=82a?= <trasz@FreeBSD.org> To: Dan Partelly <dan_partelly@rdsor.ro> Cc: freebsd-current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) Message-ID: <20160421202023.GB33506@brick> In-Reply-To: <30F6CCDE-E099-49EF-9A1A-68F147FBF50B@rdsor.ro> References: <E1asbZj-0003Ra-Qs@rmm6prod02.runbox.com> <76093.1461096570@critter.freebsd.dk> <5716AD65.8070007@shrew.net> <BF66EA01-E073-45F0-8F9E-22D57E8871B0@bsdimp.com> <5716FA70.4080604@freebsd.org> <571765BB.3050908@quip.cz> <79117ce18bd3332c7df3e55e12a161b4@rdsor.ro> <20160421095706.GA57206@brick> <30F6CCDE-E099-49EF-9A1A-68F147FBF50B@rdsor.ro>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 0421T1526, Dan Partelly wrote: > The scenario is: > > Let’s say I have autofs_enable , working with media map. > > If I have a CD in CD drive , all is well and when the system is fully booted up > /media contains a directory through which I can access the content of the > CD-ROM. Now if you eject this CD , and insert a new one, nothing happens. > /media does not contain a new access point for the new disk inserted in the > device. > > What I would expect is when I change the media in Cd-rom , a new > access point for the volume in question should be reated in /media. > > Perhaps this functionality is exposed differently by the automounter, > but them I would not expect the CDrom to be accessible at all though the > media map. If by "access point" you mean the directory, then it will, unless the CD doesn't have a label - in that case the device name will be used instead, and since it's the same device, it will be the same name - usually "cd0". However - I've just checked to make sure and it works the way it should. What you're decribing seems like you're missing the part of devd.conf(5) responsible for notifying autofs about media change. Do you? > > he problem here is that it's quite hard to fix, there's a risk > > of breaking existing functionality, and the problem is largely cosmetic. > > until you have more than 10 of them there, when it largely annoying. > anyway, what is the reason it is very hard to fix and it would break existing > functionality. can you please shed some light ? Basically, the autofs doesn't support removing the nodes. It wasn't really required for the usual use case, and it simplified the code a lot. Plan was to pick it up again with my next filesystem project, and simply retrofit the changes back to autofs - but that hasn't happened (yet). [..]
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20160421202023.GB33506>