Hi all,
While creating a sample program for an upcoming Python presentation for
GoLUG, I created about 2/3 of an automounter program (no GUI, file
manager or special program needed). It looks like it will end up being
a 100 to 200 line Python program whose stdin is provided by the output
of inotif
Hi,
One persistently tempting question about using Python, or any other
interpreted programming language, is why they are used? The main
disadvantage I see, is they are interpreted, meaning, an interpreter
is what actually runs when such code is executed. This means the
memory and CPU requirements
On Fri, 25 Dec 2015 12:42:59 -0500
Steve Litt wrote:
> Anyway, if I stick in a thumb drive that contains partitions /dev/sdd1
> and /dev/sdd2, would the most convenient way for it to automount
> be /mnt/sdd1 and /mnt/sdd2, or would it be more convenient by the ID so
> it might look like /mnt/usb-
On Fri, 25 Dec 2015 19:24:01 +0100
Edward Bartolo wrote:
> Hi,
>
> One persistently tempting question about using Python, or any other
> interpreted programming language, is why they are used?
I can answer that, always assuming speed and hardware interfacing
aren't an issue:
1) For performing
On Fri, 25 Dec 2015 15:27:02 -0300
Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Dec 2015 12:42:59 -0500
> Steve Litt wrote:
>
> > Anyway, if I stick in a thumb drive that contains
> > partitions /dev/sdd1 and /dev/sdd2, would the most convenient way
> > for it to automount be /mnt/sdd1 and /mnt/sdd
On Fri, Dec 25, 2015 at 02:35:39PM -0500, Steve Litt wrote:
> > (Why /mnt ?)
>
> Tradition. It exists on all distros I've ever seen, and it's used for
> mountpoints. Do you think the more modern, file manager-centric /media
> would be a better choice? That would be no more difficult.
Here's anoth
On Fri, 25 Dec 2015 12:44:43 -0700, Gregory wrote in message
<20151225194443.ga2...@gregn.net>:
> On Fri, Dec 25, 2015 at 02:35:39PM -0500, Steve Litt wrote:
> > > (Why /mnt ?)
> >
> > Tradition. It exists on all distros I've ever seen, and it's used
> > for mountpoints. Do you think the more mo
On Fri, 25 Dec 2015 12:44:43 -0700
Gregory Nowak wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 25, 2015 at 02:35:39PM -0500, Steve Litt wrote:
> > > (Why /mnt ?)
> >
> > Tradition. It exists on all distros I've ever seen, and it's used
> > for mountpoints. Do you think the more modern, file
> > manager-centric /media
Hi all,
According to http://directory.fsf.org/wiki/License:Expat, the License
of Expat
(http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html#GPLCompatibleLicenses)
is GNU compatible. Is Devuan able to incorporate Expat licensed
software if Devuan decides the software would be of value to the
Devuan d
FHS 2.3 apparently. They appear to serve mostly the same purpose, but /mnt
is specified as "temporarily mounted filesystems" while /media is specified
as just "removable media".
Regardless, since the implementation of /media, automounters have tended to
mount stuff there, while things manually mou
On Fri, Dec 25, 2015 at 03:10:40PM -0500, Steve Litt wrote:
> According to http://directory.fsf.org/wiki/License:Expat, the License
> of Expat
> (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html#GPLCompatibleLicenses)
> is GNU compatible. Is Devuan able to incorporate Expat licensed
> software if
Hi all,
There are too few arguments in the declaration of the funtion
*vdev_subprocess* in *libvdev/util.h*. This is:
int vdev_subprocess( char const* cmd, char* const env[], char** output,
size_t max_output, int stderr_fd, int* exit_status, bool use_shell );
The funtion is invokedin *fs/ac
On 26/12/15 12:02, aitor_czr wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> There are too few arguments in the declaration of the funtion
> *vdev_subprocess* in *libvdev/util.h*. This is:
>
> int vdev_subprocess( char const* cmd, char* const env[], char** output,
> size_t max_output, int stderr_fd, int* exit_status, bool
Hey there,
2015-12-25 18:42 GMT+01:00, Steve Litt :
> Anyway, if I stick in a thumb drive that contains partitions /dev/sdd1
> and /dev/sdd2, would the most convenient way for it to automount
> be /mnt/sdd1 and /mnt/sdd2, or would it be more convenient by the ID so
> it might look like /mnt/usb-Ge
On Fri, Dec 25, 2015 at 03:05:16PM -0500, Steve Litt wrote:
> /mnt/sdd1 and /mnt/sdd2 would be incredibly easy to implement: I could
> have it done within an hour.
>
> The only thing stopping me is that /mnt/sdd1 and /mnt/sdd2 say nothing
> about which physical thumb drive it refers to. And at dif
On Sat, 26 Dec 2015 00:50:48 +0100
Teodoro Santoni wrote:
> Hey there,
>
> 2015-12-25 18:42 GMT+01:00, Steve Litt :
> > Anyway, if I stick in a thumb drive that contains
> > partitions /dev/sdd1 and /dev/sdd2, would the most convenient way
> > for it to automount be /mnt/sdd1 and /mnt/sdd2, or w
On Fri, 25 Dec 2015 17:01:42 -0700
Gregory Nowak wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 25, 2015 at 03:05:16PM -0500, Steve Litt wrote:
> > /mnt/sdd1 and /mnt/sdd2 would be incredibly easy to implement: I
> > could have it done within an hour.
> >
> > The only thing stopping me is that /mnt/sdd1 and /mnt/sdd2 say
On Fri, Dec 25, 2015 at 10:31:25PM -0500, Steve Litt wrote:
> Wait. Then what *would* you be inclined to type in?
/mnt/sdd1 would be perfect; /mnt/[label] if available would be fine
too.
Greg
--
web site: http://www.gregn.net
gpg public key: http://www.gregn.net/pubkey.asc
skype: gregn1
(autho
On Fri, Dec 25, 2015 at 04:32:58PM -0500, Stephanie Daugherty wrote:
> FHS 2.3 apparently. They appear to serve mostly the same purpose, but /mnt
> is specified as "temporarily mounted filesystems" while /media is specified
> as just "removable media".
>
> Regardless, since the implementation of /
as long as you're not using dash or something as a user, /mnt and /media are
usually both 4 keystrokes (slash m _ tab), so the 'convenience' factor of /mnt
is nil. but I'm not sure why you'd want to blindly auto mount every partition
on an ambiguous USB device. maybe a conf file that you can add
20 matches
Mail list logo
