On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 07:37:38PM -0000, Zer0 wrote:
> //host/share did the trick. Is this still a bug or should be reported
> the way it should be from now on?
It's still a bug; mountall shouldn't mangle any fstab lines that worked with
pre-mountall scripts.
> Im asking this since on forums there are lot of threads about doing it
> like this \\host\share
> Thanks for helping resolving this issue. I personally think is better to
> do it the unix way //host/share anyway
Yes, it definitely is better; using the non-unix syntax is always going to
be a ready source of new bugs in its handling. We should be committed to
fixing those bugs when we find them, but users should spare themselves the
trouble of dealing with those bugs in the first place by using //host/share.
--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/
<email address hidden> <email address hidden>
On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 07:37:38PM -0000, Zer0 wrote:
> //host/share did the trick. Is this still a bug or should be reported
> the way it should be from now on?
It's still a bug; mountall shouldn't mangle any fstab lines that worked with
pre-mountall scripts.
> Im asking this since on forums there are lot of threads about doing it
> like this \\host\share
> Thanks for helping resolving this issue. I personally think is better to
> do it the unix way //host/share anyway
Yes, it definitely is better; using the non-unix syntax is always going to
be a ready source of new bugs in its handling. We should be committed to
fixing those bugs when we find them, but users should spare themselves the
trouble of dealing with those bugs in the first place by using //host/share.
-- www.debian. org/
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer http://
<email address hidden> <email address hidden>