Re: request for patches: showing mount options

Ian Kent
2007-07-28T06:45:59Z

On Fri, 2007-07-27 at 17:40 +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > all - fs has options, but doesn't define ->show_options()
> > some - fs defines ->show_options(), but some options are not shown
> > noopt - fs does not have options
> > good - fs shows all options
> > patch - I have a patch
>
> [...]
>
> > > autofs all
> >
> > I'm not sure I understand this.
> > How does autofs show it's options without a ->show_options method?
>
> It doesn't. The "all" means, all of them need to be added to
> ->show_options(), not that all are shown.

Oh .. sorry, I wasn't paying enough attention.

But now might be a good time to propose the removal of autofs and rename
autofs4 to autofs. I would need to provide some way to map autofs4
module load requests to autofs for backward compatibility but haven't
thought about that yet.

>
> I can see now that this is slightly confusing, sorry.
>
> So the ones that need attention are "all" and "some". The others are
> fine in theory. Of course I may have missed something.
>
> > > autofs4 some
> >
> > OK, uid and gid aren't shown.
> > That should be straight forward to fix.
> > What's your time frame for this?
>
> ASAP ;)
>
> 2.6.24 would be a nice, but it won't be easy...

The autofs4 (and, if needed autofs) should be straight forward.
I'll do these.

Ian