Re: smb: more than broken?
Gordon Chaffee (chaffee@CS.Berkeley.EDU)
Fri, 19 Dec 1997 21:52:20 -0800 (PST)
Robey Pointer writes:
> I've since come to the belief that we should keep a separate 'smbmount'
> -- in fact, it would be nice if NFS did the same ('nfsmount'?), and then
> let 'mount' do the native filesystems manually, while running the
> external utilities for add-on filesystems. That way, adding things like
> coda or smb will change only a few lines in 'mount'.
This is what at least FreeBSD has. Using mount on an nfs filesystem
ends up calling mount_nfs. Here are all the ones that I seem to have
on a FreeBSD box:
mount mount_ext2fs mount_lfs mount_nfs mount_procfs mount_union
mount_cd9660 mount_fdesc mount_mfs mount_null mount_std
mount_devfs mount_kernfs mount_msdos mount_portal mount_umap
Your idea is reasonable.
- Gordon