plans and wishes

Joel Miller cheeziologist at mail.isc.rit.edu
Thu Jan 22 16:08:51 PST 2004


On Thu, 22 Jan 2004 22:51:39 +0100, Alex Groenewoud 
<alex at linuxfromscratch.org> wrote:

<snip>
>> Why can't we just continue to use /mnt/lfs but without the variable?
>
> We could, but it's ugly -- or rather I find it ugly.  What's more, when

That is your asthetic preference Alex. I happen to have different asthetic 
preferences than you. There are people that have different asthetic 
preferences than both of us. It is a waste of time to argue asthetics, 
IMHO, because everyone will chime in differently. See this thread if you 
require more examples of that.

> reading carefully, the FHS never speaks of subdirectories of /mnt, it
> just says that _/mnt_ is provided to temporarily mount _a_ filesystem,
> it doesn't mention subdirs nor speaks of filesystems.  I know it's
> common practice to use subdirs of /mnt, but I don't like it.  What I in

see above. I'll also note that your extrememly literal interpretation of 
that statement in the FHS is not in agreement with my interpretation of 
it. Thus we go back to different people with different 
preferences/interpretations. Again, a pointless argument.

> fact would like to see the book use is not $LFS, not /mnt/lfs, not /lfs,
> but /mnt.  But I guessed that would receive universal opposition.
>

Even if I agreed with you, that would be crazy because the hosts people 
would be building from don't agree with your narrow interpretation of the 
/mnt directory. Any distro I have ever used creates subdirectories of /mnt 
to mount various things and if we were to mount the lfs partition onto 
/mnt directly then they would lose all their mount points.

>> Making partition mounts under /mnt is the Unix way IMHO. Anything else

Amen!

>> is
>> "admin preference" and borderline. The LSB lists have seen some lively
>> flames about mount points in recent months i.e. /media and what not. 
>> Worth a
>> read.
>
> I can imagine.  When looking for FHS2.2, I grabbed 2.3beta too...  They
> have gone mad!  No admin is going to give up /cdrom and /floppy and use
> /media/cdrom and /media/floppy instead!  When I need to mount something
> and /mnt is occupied, I do mkdir and mount it there.  Yes, _software_
> should obey the rules.  But if an admin is not free to do whatever she
> pleases on her own system, where have we ended up?
>
> Alex
>

This last paragraph is again your preference and not necissarily anyone 
else's. I happen to mount floppies under /mnt/floppy and cdroms under 
/mnt/cdrom. Your entire argument to change /mnt/lfs to /lfs is best on 
your personal preferences. You will never get agreement on this list or 
any other as to what "looks the best" or what "feels wrong" and what 
doesn't.

-- 
Registered LFS User 6929
Registered Linux User 298182




More information about the lfs-dev mailing list