On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 5:16 PM, Pascal Hambourg <pas...@plouf.fr.eu.org> wrote: > Joel Rees a écrit : >> >> Thinking in terms of partitions as the things you mount in /etc/fstab. > > Err, no.
Sometimes you think of things in ways that don't match the common convention. Sometimes those ways of thinking spill out onto the WWW. Anyone else feeling the desparate need to correct me, go ahead, just realize you are going to add to the confusion. > The things you mount in /etc/fstab are filesystems, not > partitions. A filesystem may not even lie in a partition or volume > (think about tmpfs, nfs...). That's the common way of explaining fstab, and it is, indeed, the way I should have explained it if I were going to bother explaining it where slaves to convention congregate. But, one, I don't have time to pull in the entire set of common convention definitions every time I comment on a mailing list, and, two, many here are not familiar with all the common conventions yet, and, three, there are often contexts in which slavery to convention neatly avoids mapping the concepts that are being confused. Sorry for the acid spill, Pascal. You are not the one who raised the PH level of my mental processes, you just happened to tip the beaker was all. Chris was a little more to blame, but the primary blame for my attitude right now is not on this list. And that's my problem, not the list's. But there are a lot of people here who could profit by giving each other a break. -- Joel Rees Be careful when you look at conspiracy. Arm yourself with knowledge of yourself, as well: http://reiisi.blogspot.jp/2011/10/conspiracy-theories.html
