[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [MiNT] MiNTLib 0.52.3b

> From: owner-mint@fishpool.com [mailto:owner-mint@fishpool.com]On Behalf
> Of Jo-Even.Skarstein@gjensidige.no
> Sent: Friday, August 06, 1999 2:43 PM
> To: mint@fishpool.com
> Subject: RE: [MiNT] MiNTLib 0.52.3b
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From:	Frank Naumann [SMTP:fnaumann@mail.CS.Uni-Magdeburg.De]
> > Sent:	Friday, August 06, 1999 12:34 PM
> > To:	Jo-Even.Skarstein@gjensidige.no
> > Cc:	mint@fishpool.com
> > Subject:	RE: [MiNT] MiNTLib 0.52.3b
> >
> > That's the problem in this case to use U: instead? And if you umount /c
> >
> Nothing, atleast not in this particular example. I just wanted to
> point out
> that this *is* a problem (although a rare one), and that it can easily be
> "fixed" with a symlink.
> Julian points out that all devices are guaranteed to be available on /.
> Well, this is not entirely correct. While MiNT has always mounted all
> filesystems on /, it doesn't say anywhere that this will always be so. It

It's the only working method to inquire a list of all available file
systems. You can't rely on drvbits, so you *have* to use the contents of U:.

> also doesn't guarantee the *names*, so doing what LZH-Shell does is
> obviously broken behaviour.

Of course. Nobody should expect particular names. A CD-ROM might appear as
u:\cd, that's already possible right now.

> > or c: (this is equal for the kernel) it's not the right
> behaviour that /c
> > not exist anymore? And if you mount it to /f/tmp it's not right that you
> > can only access it through /f/tmp then?
> >
> Normally yes. I don't see a problem in moving the mountpoints around, as
> potential problems with programs that makes assumptions about names can
> easily be circumvented with a symlink.

As I said, I don't like it, because existing code might fail just because
people forget the symlinks. And I haven't been convinced why it is a problem
to keep them accessible in U: if you allow people to hide the entries.

> However, we must not forget that this is MiNT - a TOS-derivate -
> so even if
> /c is moved to e.g. /var/tos/c (or something stupid like that) I think it
> still should be available through c:.

But then I would point out, that it *is* guaranteed that <driveletter>: is
also available under u:\<driveletter>.