Re: mount_nfs -T -i --> fstab?
From: jpd (read_the_sig_at_do.not.spam.it.invalid)
Date: 30 Dec 2004 22:26:49 GMT
On 2004-12-30, Per Hedeland <email@example.com> wrote:
> In article <klLAd.31234$F25.2769@okepread07> firstname.lastname@example.org (Conrad
> J. Sabatier) writes:
>>SRVR:/nfs/share /some/mount/point nfs rw,-Ti 0 0
>>should do the trick.
> Are you sure? I haven't tried it recently, but ISTR that only the words
> allowed with the -o option can be given in the fstab options field, and
> fstab(5) seems to agree.
If you can pass it to mount -o, it can go into that field. Note that
the opions mentioned are options to mount_nfs, so mount -o-Ti will end
up as mount_nfs -Ti, which is what you want. I must admit not having
tried with mount_nfs, but mount_smbfs I've had the opportunity and need
to pass options in that way, and that worked.
> In this case it should be OK to use
> SRVR:/nfs/share /some/mount/point nfs rw,tcp,intr 0 0
> - but not all mount_xxx options are available in -o form. Hm,
> mount_nfs(8) lists those as "Historic" and "deprecated" - hopefully that
> just refers to their usage with mount_nfs, the possibility to specify
> mount_xxx options in fstab is something that should be extended IMHO,
> not reduced...
I tend to agree, and while I haven't really tried to find out more about
it, I am fairly curious to know why. It sounds a bit like a variant of
the dreaded --long-options-are-teh-leet - disease. ICBW, of course.
-- j p d (at) d s b (dot) t u d e l f t (dot) n l .