From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: bensberg@justemail.net Message-Id: <1405351467.26224.141460601.7C1F0818@webmail.messagingengine.com> From: Benno Schulenberg To: Karel Zak Cc: "Util-Linux" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain In-Reply-To: <20140714145759.GM30288@x2.net.home> References: <1405331864.10850.141333833.2F92BBFD@webmail.messagingengine.com> <20140714145759.GM30288@x2.net.home> Subject: Re: mount: what is the point of 'nouser' on the command line? Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 17:24:27 +0200 List-ID: On Mon, Jul 14, 2014, at 16:57, Karel Zak wrote: > The "user" option is alias to "noexec,nosuid,nodev" mount flags. Ehm... Not quite. It *implies* those options, to lightly protect the user from some dangers, but its main purpose is to allow ordinary users to mount the filesystem so marked in fstab. No? > > So, is it ever useful to specify '-o nouser' on the command line? > > No, it would be better to remove it from the example Will submit a patch later. > > Something else. On the man page of umount, shouldn't it say that > > the -O and -t options are only effective in combination with -a? > > The -t is generic and it's usable in more case (for example to > specify filesystem that should be tried for the device). Ehm... I was talking about umount here, not mount. :) Benno -- http://www.fastmail.fm - A no graphics, no pop-ups email service