Mailing Lists: Apple Mailing Lists
Image of Mac OS face in stamp
 
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: using mount

> On 30-03-2002 13:57, "Eric Peyton" <email@hidden> wrote:

>
> mount and umount work fine in single user mode with HFS(+) you just need
> to make sure you are using mount_hfs or mount -t hfs.
>

I tried that... It never worked for me until I figured out that
autodiskmountd must be running first. Then everything worked. Are you
positive about trying this in single user mode? Basically I just had to type
autodiskmountd&. OS X versus Darwin.. I am not sure what differences there
might be.

>> ( Sigh.. What is it about inetd that every developer seems intent on
>> avoiding its use? )
>
> inetd would not be appropriate for autodiskmount usage in any way.
> autodiskmount is not socket based, needs to be running at all time
> because it communicates directly with IOKit messaging and needs to be
> available to read from the kit on startup without anyone "messaging" it.
>

This seems to be true for hfs.util as well. I see. Hmmmm... And IOKit
messaging uses what IPC mechanism? Or does it just take advantage of the
fact that threads are really just object-based shared memory?

Thanks!

>>
>> I've found that umount works fine, consistently, with ufs file
>> systems. I
>> have yet to see any issues or problems related to disk arbitration.
>> Which I
>> guess means that the standard BSD mechanisms are still basically intact.
>>
>
> Of course they are. Disk Arbitration is a layer directly on top of the
> standard BSD mechanisms.
>

Ahhh.. Okay..

>> Its a different story with HFS+. The only "disk" I wish to see in the
>> finder is root. The rest I access from root via links. I would like to tell
>> autodiskmount to not automatically mount disks in /Volumes.
>
> This will be supported at some time. But if this is really what you
> want - why don't you just shut autodiskmount off (in the Disks startup
> item). NO secondary disks will mount until you explicitly mount them by
> hand.
>

Yes, but then fstab won't work either.. I tried that.. Again from what I've
observed and experienced it must run in order to use mount -t hfs,
mount_hfs, and PC FAT file systems. Is there any way we can verify that
mount -t hfs does not require autodiskmount?

> The next major release will have fstab support in autodiskmount so you
> can mount your volumes whereever you wish based on UUID. This was
> discussed at great length in the past on this list - check the archives.
>
>> With HFS+ the only way to do this seems to be to set a bit in the partition
>> with pdisk. I haven't experimented with that yet. I am assuming that might
>> allow me to use umount and mount with consistent results. I think it would
>> use something called hfs.util to do the actual work.
>
> hfs.util just calls through to the mount_hfs and umount commands any
> way ... (in the long run).

Thought it was the reverse? I believe that's what the man pages said?

>
>>
>> Arbitration is still a problem EVEN when you let it do it its way. With
>> multiple partitions (HFS+), every fourth update/install seems to fail.
>
> Have you filed a bug. I have tested huge numbers of partitions and this
> has never been an issue.
>

Don't know how to file a bug. I haven't learned that secret yet. I also
mount /library, /applications, /var, and /users separately.. Had /system as
well but that made the update process and installing even flakier.. And I
had to "trick" the system.... Not a good thing in the long run..

>> Right now I am having problems with iTunes. I have multiple boot partitions
>> (3 including CLASSIC). It doesn't like that.
>
> Um - on one machine I have had up to 6 boot partitions and never had a
> problem with arbitration ...
>

I have two OS X boot partitions. Did you try that? One is ufs and the other
is hfs.

>> The installer seems to have a
>> problem determining which partition I booted from...
>
> No - the installer knows exactly where the boot partition is. It sounds
> like the iTunes installer has issues, not arbitration.
>

Perhaps... As most updates do seem to work properly. Also had problems with
the recent AirPort update... And they return status successful. Except in
the case of iTunes software update knows it wasn't successful. It keeps
asking me to update it over and over again.

> Eric
_______________________________________________
darwin-development mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives: http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/darwin-development
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
References: 
 >Re: using mount (From: Eric Peyton <email@hidden>)



Visit the Apple Store online or at retail locations.
1-800-MY-APPLE

Contact Apple | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2007 Apple Inc. All rights reserved.