Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com From: Chris Faylor Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 22:58:20 -0400 To: cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com Subject: Re: mount doesn't complain about missing "mount directory" any more? Message-ID: <20000613225819.A12800@cygnus.com> Reply-To: cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com References: <20000613213415 DOT A20386 AT cygnus DOT com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: ; from fujieda@jaist.ac.jp on Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 11:39:51AM +0900 On Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 11:39:51AM +0900, Kazuhiro Fujieda wrote: >>>> On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 21:34:15 -0400 >>>> Chris Faylor said: > >> It looks like mount does not complain about a missing mount point directory >> any more although AFAICT the code is still there to do so. > >I can still observe mount without -f option complains about a >missing mount point directory. Ok. I'm sorry. I didn't remember that -f avoided the error. Is this new or has it always been like that? Btw, it sure would be nice if you could do this: mount c:/foo /foo umount c:/foo #doesn't work (but would be nice) umount /foo #work If you have an idle moment it would be nice to add this functionality to mount to make it behave more like the UNIX version. (Hope you don't mind my subtle hinting) cgf