[patch] progress with autofs.

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

On Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 02:37:52AM +0200, David Zeuthen wrote:

> So, what I'm thinking is that this is just a third way to enforce policy
> using hal. Hence, why I like the separation. Also, the changes to hald
> seems to be pretty minimalistic, if any, given your message below, is
> this correct? It would be good to have a configure option to turn this
> on and off.

it's going to have to be a bit more than a configure option: certain
disks will need to be excluded from the autofs system, and those
should go into /etc/fstab instead.

which is another reason why it might not be sensible to split fstab-sync
into a separate version doing autofs.

maybe there are other ways to do this:

	two programs reading the same conf file, one which says "all
	entries in this conf file, i place in /etc/fstab" and the other
	"all entries NOT in this conf file , i place in /etc/auto.hal".

	yuk!

at some point i will think about how do do changes in behaviour of
HAL depending on whether a volume was managed by fstab-sync in autofs
mode or fstab-sy in non-autofs mode.

at the moment, i've put it as a top-level /etc/hal/hald.conf option.

l.

_______________________________________________
hal mailing list
hal at freedesktop.org
http://freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/hal