Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!necntc!ima!think!barmar
From: barmar@think.COM (Barry Margolin)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: //host vs "mount point"
Message-ID: <12122@think.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 23-Nov-87 15:53:26 EST
Article-I.D.: think.12122
Posted: Mon Nov 23 15:53:26 1987
Date-Received: Thu, 26-Nov-87 07:07:30 EST
References: <648@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> <1668@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> <9398@tekecs.TEK.COM>
Sender: usenet@think.UUCP
Reply-To: barmar@sauron.UUCP (Barry Margolin)
Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 21

In article <9398@tekecs.TEK.COM> andrew@frip.gwd.tek.com (Andrew Klossner) writes:
>  But I
>can't mount all these systems in /etc/rc; there are too many of them,
>access permissions are fluid (just like working directories), and
>Murphy's Law says the one I want will have rebooted since I last
>mounted it so I'll have to remount it anyway.

If you use a stateless protocol such as NFS the last problem (servers
rebooting) goes away.  Mounting them in the background partially
alleviates the problem of there being too many; while you may still
have to wait for a particular file system to be mounted before you can
reference it, you don't have to wait for all of them before you can
start using the machine.  I don't know what you mean by "access
permissions are fluid".

---
Barry Margolin
Thinking Machines Corp.

barmar@think.com
seismo!think!barmar