Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Message-ID: <17B78BDF120BD411B70100500422FC6309E564@IIS000> From: Bernard Dautrevaux To: "'Robert Collins'" , Bernard Dautrevaux , cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: RE: Default mounts : one redundant? Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 10:01:26 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > -----Original Message----- > From: Robert Collins [mailto:robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au] > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 9:50 AM > To: Bernard Dautrevaux; cygwin AT cygwin DOT com > Subject: RE: Default mounts : one redundant? > > > This is off-topic, it belongs on cygwin-xfree AT cygwin DOT com. And > the answer > is in that lists archives. OK so if I understand correctly, the redundant mount here is effectively useless, as the "/" mount is done in binary mode, but is created by the cygwin-Xfree post-install script because "/" may be mounted in text mode. My question was just motivated by the fact the mount option were identical; I ask it here because this is in fact a general cygwin topic: if I *need* something to be accessed in binary mode (and don't want to look at all refering programs) I must mount the tree binary, even if the mount may be, in some cases, redundant. And that is not, IMNSHO, off-topic. Bernard -------------------------------------------- Bernard Dautrevaux Microprocess Ingenierie 97 bis, rue de Colombes 92400 COURBEVOIE FRANCE Tel: +33 (0) 1 47 68 80 80 Fax: +33 (0) 1 47 88 97 85 e-mail: dautrevaux AT microprocess DOT com -------------------------------------------- > > Rob > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Bernard Dautrevaux [mailto:Dautrevaux AT microprocess DOT com] > > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 5:43 PM > > To: 'cygwin AT cygwin DOT com' > > Subject: RE: Default mounts : one redundant? > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Christopher Faylor [mailto:cgf AT redhat DOT com] > > > Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 6:39 PM > > > To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com > > > Subject: Re: Default mounts : one redundant? > > > > > > > > > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 04:39:12PM +0100, > > > fergus AT bonhard DOT uklinux DOT net wrote: > > > >Nothing altered from the default full installation: > > > > > > > >~> mount -m > > > >mount -f -s -b "c:/Cygwin/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts" > > > >"/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts" > > > >mount -f -s -b "c:/Cygwin/bin" "/usr/bin" > > > >mount -f -s -b "c:/Cygwin/lib" "/usr/lib" > > > >mount -f -s -b "c:/Cygwin" "/" > > > >mount -s -b --change-cygdrive-prefix "/cygdrive" > > > >~> > > > > > > > >If c:/Cygwin is mounted under /, is it necessary to have > > > >c:/Cygwin/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts mounted additionally under > > > >/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts? > > > > > > Yes. > > > > > > > And is it too much to ask why? > > > > Bernard > > > > -------------------------------------------- > > Bernard Dautrevaux > > Microprocess Ingenierie > > 97 bis, rue de Colombes > > 92400 COURBEVOIE > > FRANCE > > Tel: +33 (0) 1 47 68 80 80 > > Fax: +33 (0) 1 47 88 97 85 > > e-mail: dautrevaux AT microprocess DOT com > > -------------------------------------------- > > > > -- > > Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple > > Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html > > Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html > > FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ > > > > > -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/