Re: fstab vs autofs

On Sat, 2010-11-13 at 00:33 +, Timothy Murphy wrote: > What exactly is the outcome if the remote host cannot be mounted? Booting can take ages, more so if you had several mounts. Then logon was painful, if any of those mounts was to be mounted within the homespace. > It seemed from what I re

Re: fstab vs autofs

Tim wrote: >> Incidentally, the sample /etc/auto.master in Fedora-14 >> ends with the line >> +auto.master >> but I've been unable to find any explanation of this. > > See man auto.master ... >Additionally, a map may be included from its source as if it were >it- self present in

Re: fstab vs autofs

Tim wrote: >> What exactly is the advantage of using autofs >> over an entry or entries in /etc/fstab ? > > Autofs only mounts the device when you/something requests access to the > mount point. fstab will try mounting it at boot time, unless you add a > noauto parameter. It's somewhat easier t

Re: fstab vs autofs

On 12/11/10 10:47 AM, Tim wrote: > On Fri, 2010-11-12 at 14:30 +, Timothy Murphy wrote: >> What exactly is the advantage of using autofs >> over an entry or entries in /etc/fstab ? > Autofs only mounts the device when you/something requests access to the > mount point. fstab will try mounting

Re: fstab vs autofs

On Fri, 2010-11-12 at 14:30 +, Timothy Murphy wrote: > What exactly is the advantage of using autofs > over an entry or entries in /etc/fstab ? Autofs only mounts the device when you/something requests access to the mount point. fstab will try mounting it at boot time, unless you add a noauto

fstab vs autofs

What exactly is the advantage of using autofs over an entry or entries in /etc/fstab ? I've always used autofs for mounting a remote directory, but on going over to Fedora-14 I decided to read the documentation on this, eg and