7 Dec
2022
7 Dec
'22
7:04 p.m.
Hi Folks,
The world seems to be headed toward universal multiple config files in the form
<dir>.d. There are about fifty of them in /etc.
I mount some filesystems "universally", under "/net/...", and, when
appropriate, in a user directory, "/home/<user>/net/...". This gives me
better granularity of permissions. My fstab has become cumbersome and today I asked the
question, "Maybe there is an /etc/fstab.d? Son-of-a-bitch! There is! Well, I mean, I
find scattered, inaccurate references, but it is not clear to me that it works on Fedora
36, and initial experiments indicate otherwise. I can still use it, but I have a script
that combines all my "components" and replaces the "real" /etc/fstab,
and that's not too bad, but it is a hack, and I'd rather find out if it is
supposed to work and find out why mine doesn't.
Anybody have any experience with /etc/fstab.d?
Thanks for the help,
--
Chris.
V:916.799.9461
F:916.974.0428
A: Because we read from top to bottom, left to right.
Q: > Why should I start my reply below the quoted text?
7 Dec
7 Dec
7:16 p.m.
Hi Chris,
When it comes to fstab, I have not dealt with *fstab.d* as you mention in
your below post. When I do man fstab, my Debian server doesn't reference
it. Maybe Debian uses an older version of
[util-linux](https://mirrors.edge.kernel.org/pub/linux/utils/util-linux/v2.3….
I imagine that most distributions are using the *util-linux*. It
probably has the answers.
I notice that auto mounter will create a mount point automatically when
you plug in a new device. There is also autofs. Perhaps this article
will give you more to ponder.
https://www.redhat.com/sysadmin/mount-nfs-filesystems-autofs
Brian
On Wed, Dec 07, 2022 at 11:04:06AM -0800, Chris Miller wrote:
Hi Folks,
The world seems to be headed toward universal multiple config files in
the form <dir>.d. There are about fifty of them in /etc.
I mount some filesystems "universally", under "/net/...", and,
when
appropriate, in a user directory, "/home/<user>/net/...". This gives
me
better granularity of permissions. My fstab has become cumbersome and
today I asked the question, "Maybe there is an /etc/fstab.d?
Son-of-a-bitch! There is! Well, I mean, I find scattered, inaccurate
references, but it is not clear to me that it works on Fedora 36, and
initial experiments indicate otherwise. I can still use it, but I have
a script that combines all my "components" and replaces the
"real"
/etc/fstab, and that's not too bad, but it is a hack, and I'd rather
find out if it is supposed to work and find out why mine doesn't.
Anybody have any experience with /etc/fstab.d?
Thanks for the help,
--
Chris.
V:916.799.9461
F:916.974.0428
A: Because we read from top to bottom, left to right.
Q: > Why should I start my reply below the quoted text?
_______________________________________________
Lug-nuts mailing list -- lug-nuts(a)bigbrie.com
To unsubscribe send an email to lug-nuts-leave(a)bigbrie.com
--
Brian Lavender
http://www.brie.com/brian/
"There are two ways of constructing a software design. One way is to
make it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies. And the other
way is to make it so complicated that there are no obvious deficiencies."
Professor C. A. R. Hoare
The 1980 Turing award lecture
8 Dec
8 Dec
2:38 a.m.
I found this:
The /etc/fstab.d support has been reverted from mount(8) after upstream discussion. The
mount tab directories are supported by libmount only. It's not planned to support
fstab.d in mount(8) by default.
The problem is that /etc/fstab is de facto standard used on many places (libc, systemd,
UI programs, ..) and it's unreal wish that all the places can be changed to support
fstab.d.
in this StackExchange thread:
https://askubuntu.com/questions/168290/why-cant-mount-read-files-in-etc-fst…
-Gary
On Wed, Dec 07, 2022 at 11:04:06AM -0800, Chris Miller wrote:
Hi Folks,
The world seems to be headed toward universal multiple config files in the form
<dir>.d. There are about fifty of them in /etc.
I mount some filesystems "universally", under "/net/...", and, when
appropriate, in a user directory, "/home/<user>/net/...". This gives me
better granularity of permissions. My fstab has become cumbersome and today I asked the
question, "Maybe there is an /etc/fstab.d? Son-of-a-bitch! There is! Well, I mean, I
find scattered, inaccurate references, but it is not clear to me that it works on Fedora
36, and initial experiments indicate otherwise. I can still use it, but I have a script
that combines all my "components" and replaces the "real" /etc/fstab,
and that's not too bad, but it is a hack, and I'd rather find out if it is
supposed to work and find out why mine doesn't.
Anybody have any experience with /etc/fstab.d?
Thanks for the help,
--
Chris.
V:916.799.9461
F:916.974.0428
A: Because we read from top to bottom, left to right.
Q: > Why should I start my reply below the quoted text?
_______________________________________________
Lug-nuts mailing list -- lug-nuts(a)bigbrie.com
To unsubscribe send an email to lug-nuts-leave(a)bigbrie.com
2:56 a.m.
Hi Gary,
I found this:
The /etc/fstab.d support has been reverted from
mount(8) after upstream
discussion. The mount tab directories are supported by libmount only. It's not
planned to support fstab.d in mount(8) by default.
The problem is that /etc/fstab is de facto standard
used on many places (libc,
systemd, UI programs, ..) and it's unreal wish that all the places can be
changed to support fstab.d.
in this StackExchange thread:
https://askubuntu.com/questions/168290/why-cant-mount-read-files-in-etc-fst…
Outstanding! Authoritative and comprehensive.
It looks like my accumulation script is just about the best I can do, and the truth is, it
is fine, as long as I remember to update /etc/fstab if I ever change any of my components.
/etc/fstab does not change very often, and the cost of forgetting to update /etc/fstab
from my collected components, should I forget, is to simply update /etc/fstab -- nearly
zero penalty.
Give yourself a raise!
Thanks for the help,
--
Chris.
V:916.799.9461
F:916.974.0428
A: Because we read from top to bottom, left to right.
Q: > Why should I start my reply below the quoted text?
523
days inactive
524
days old
3 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Brian E. Lavender -
Chris Miller -
Gary