From: Scott Mcdermott Subject: Re: [OT] (autofs) Re: Direct mounts on Linux Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 02:23:51 -0500 Sender: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Message-ID: <20030121072351.GC12523@questra.com> References: <15916.14776.460148.770017@lemming.engeast.baynetworks.com> <20030120214134.GE1042@questra.com> <20030121030851.GG10369@questra.com> <20030121040318.GI10369@questra.com> <20030121064851.GK10369@questra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: To: nfs@sourceforge.net In-Reply-To: Errors-To: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Discussion of NFS under Linux development, interoperability, and testing. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Paul Smith on Tue 21/01 02:05 -0500: > No, I mean getcwd(3), the C runtime library function... if my program > invokes this then it doesn't matter what the shell does. Not if you chdir("/") like a good little daemon yeah I know, I get your point :) If that is the only argument against direct mounts though, I really don't understand statements like "[Autofs. Will. Never. Support. Direct. Maps. Period. Full Stop.]" (see autofs mailing list archives from H. Peter Anvin) ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com _______________________________________________ NFS maillist - NFS@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs