on Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 06:45:30PM -0600, Hanasaki JiJi wrote about Re: autofs vs amd: Is there a preference?: > anyone have a config for amd to automount home dirs? off redundant > hostnames? > > in amd, when fileserver:/exports/[export1] is automounted, the > files/dirs in [export1] are accessable but not viewable in a "ls" Any > way to change this?
No. This is just how the automounter works. Can you imagine what kind of a "mount-storm" you would have if someone just used an ls, or tab completion in the parent directory (in your case /mnt/dir1)? FYI, the O'Reilly book "Managing NFS and NIS" explains this quite well. > ex: > automount fileserver:/exports/dir1 to > /mnt/dir1 > ls /mnt/dir1 ==> no files shown > cd /mnt/dir1/somedir and ls > works fine > > mount fileserver:/exports/dir1 /mnt/dir1 > ls /mnt/dir1 ==> shows somedir > cd /mnt/dir1/somedir and ls > works fine > > Alvin Oga wrote: > >hi ya robert > > > > > >>on Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 12:07:41PM -0500, Robert L. Harris wrote about > >>autofs vs amd: Is there a preference?: > >> > >>> > >>>I'm looking at my automount situation and wondering. Is one going > >>>away? Which is the "way to go" for automounting, amd or autofs? > > > > > >autofs vs amd is like tinydns vs bind or exim vs sendmail > >( its does it do the minimum you need or is it loaded w/ unused features > > > >one thing that both is missing is "multi-homed servers" > > if www1.foo.com is down, than it uses www2.foo.com or www3.foo.com > > but at least one can do all that in other tools > > > > its more critical for your home/user's servers on your local lan > > > >use autofs ... simple answer > > > >c ya > >alvin > > > > > > -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Those who do not understand Unix are condemned to reinvent it, poorly." -- Henry Spencer
msg25441/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
