[arch-general] [arch-dev-public] initscripts changes

RedShift redshift at pandora.be
Sun Apr 6 18:24:37 EDT 2008

Thomas Bächler wrote:
> RedShift schrieb:
>> Thomas Bächler wrote:
>>> I am hacking initscripts and can't quite decide on two issues:
>>> 1) I'd like to hardcode /dev/pts/ mounting in rc.sysinit.
>> What's wrong with putting that in fstab? What if I don't want to have 
>> that mounted? So instead of modified fstab I'd have to mess with 
>> rc.sysinit everytime the initscripts get upgraded? This is the same 
>> discussion as with moving lo to rc.sysinit instead of leaving it in 
>> rc.conf. Uterly pointless.
> The point is, everyone needs it mounted. Your system will be completely 
> useless without devpts (as it is without the lo interface).
> However, I know your opinion on these issues. Are there any rational 
> reasons not to hardcode devpts?

Yes. It's not logical. fstab was made for mounting filesystems, why even consider moving it to rc.sysinit? It's not because it makes the system unusable without it, that it should be moved to rc.sysinit. Why the change anyway? What's the benefit? Now we're going to see "Heeey stuff's being mounted that's not in fstab? wtf?". This change is just plain irrational, fstab was _specifically made_ for mounting filesystems. If you're going to hardcode stuff like that you might as well throw away fstab.


More information about the arch-general mailing list