[SLE] subfs problems (Was: subfs & Doug's ranting)
Choice is a wonderful thing. Yes, subfs makes Linux work like Windows for
floppy and CD. That is not per se an improvement, it is just a change.
Far more preferable for a distribution would be to offer a choice. This is
especially true in the case of subfs, which as shipped is broken in more
than one place. Yes, I can change it back (maybe), but what do I do about
the next release? What do I do about the several hundred users I support?
Most of them are comfortable with the concept of mount/umount. Anybody
tried mounting an already subfs mounted device? Unfortunately it works.
Mount shows the device mounted at two dirs and can indeed be accessed via
those dirs. However, neither mount can be unmounted (I presume because
each mount sees the other mount as in use). Simple to fix, just reboot
(Windows like behavior I normally try to avoid with Linux). After having
installed 9.1 on a dozen or so x86 and x86_64 machines, single and dual
processors, with varying disk and graphic setups, I feel ambivalent about
it. There are many nice improvements and of course the wonderful new
kernel. Then there are things like subfs, which causes me a great deal of
embarrassment. The first client machine I put 9.1 on, I still do not have
their USB devices working flawlessly (as they did under 9.0). "Here, use
this, it is better but it is broken!", does not go well in the real world.
SuSE keep up the good work but remember, there is a layer of expertise
between you and most users of your product (present company excepted).
Now the problem.
New install of SuSE 9.1.
USB devices neither seen nor mountable in any fashion. Floppy and
DVD-R/W using subfs OK.
YOU automatic update.
Some USB devices subfs mount and are accessible. Some subfs mount
but are NOT accessible (either read or write).
Some (CF+ Microdrive, fat16 or fat32) are in some kind of system
purgatory. Fdisk -l shows the device and partition (eg. sda1).
fdisk /dev/sda shows sda1 partition and allows manipulation,
changes, etc. lsusb shows the interconnect. No subfs mount.
YAST disk partitioner shows sda disk but no sda1 partition!
Absolutely no way I can get this to mount (sda1 is not a block device!).
YAST disk partitioner; create sda1 on sda (obliterating data on
disk); mount point obligatory.
mount shows subfs mount of Microdrive (hooray!) and
regular mount by YAST at mount point (OOPS!)
Reading and writing to Microdrive works fine (and fast)
via both mounts but will not unmount (see above).
Reboot, fdisk -l sees sda1, YAST does not, no subfs
mount, sda1 not a block device. Back in pugatory.
Probably just my not knowing how this is supposed to work, so could someone
point me to some good documentation (other than what comes with 9.1 on
subfs and USB)?
Or, if subfs is still subpar, where are the instructions on going back to
9.0 behaviour?
Best Regards,
Bob
|---------+---------------------------->
| | BandiPat |
| |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | | | To: SuSE Linux List
| | cc: | | Subject: [SLE] subfs & Doug's ranting | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Doug remarked: I wasn't asking permission, I was asking what the devil this is (subfs), and why we should have it at all? /rant on It also seems to me, that if Linux is to become a desktop system, it has to become more user-friendly, not less. If it is only going to be used in the corporate workplace, then probably a lot of these protective devices need to be in place, but if I'm going to use it in my home--without any kids, even--then there should be a simple way to turn most of these protections off. There does not seem to be any real need to prevent the user from writing to most of the media, except the root files. There might be a simple setup to allow a few users (mom, Pop, and the kids) separate permissions, but the idea of preventing anyone from doing anything ever is ridiculous. And, even someone in an office might like to copy something to a floppy or a CD for safe keeping. Yeah, maybe Linux doesn't crash, but systems do. rant off/ --doug =============== Doug, You obviously haven't seen 9.1 yet or you would have a better understanding of the subfs system. As Patrick pointed out, it is indeed something to add user friendliness to the Linux desktop. It is something that is needed to draw other OS users to Linux on the desktop. How many times have you tried explaining to someone why you have to "mount" or "unmount" removable drives in Linux? They begin to think you are talking about your computer in sexual terms after a bit! ;o) That is the reason for subfs system, to eliminate that. I think this relates to the "supermount" project, which kinda died and is now the "submount" thing in SuSE. You no longer have to mount or unmount, it's done automatically with this. Just put a disc/disk in, it reads it, opens it and when done, hit the eject button on the drive! I too agree with Patrick, in that a bit of reading before ranting might have helped to prevent the rant. ;o) As always, Linux is about choice and you can revert your setup back to the old way, if you so desire. So far, I haven't seen any reason to do that as this is quite convenient and I'm already spoiled. Regards, Lee -- --- KMail v1.6.2 --- SuSE Linux Pro v9.1 --- Registered Linux User #225206 On any other day, that might seem strange... -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
I agree, with regards to the problems of subfs. Is there a way to turn this "off" for lack of a better way to phrase the question? I'd like to use the old mount/umount system personally. Preston
Hi, On Tuesday 08 June 2004 18:35, Preston Crawford wrote:
I agree, with regards to the problems of subfs. Is there a way to turn this "off" for lack of a better way to phrase the question? I'd like to use the old mount/umount system personally.
Yes: http://portal.suse.com/sdb/en/2004/05/hmeyer_91_revert_from_subfs.html Greetings from Bremen hartmut
Preston Crawford wrote:
I agree, with regards to the problems of subfs. Is there a way to turn this "off" for lack of a better way to phrase the question? I'd like to use the old mount/umount system personally.
Preston
Search back in the list to May 21-25 for a thread titled: "Why does USB drive mount automagically?" for postings by Sjoerd Hiemstra Good day! -- ____________________________________ Christopher R. Carlen Principal Laser/Optical Technologist Sandia National Laboratories CA USA crcarle@sandia.gov
Preston Crawford wrote:
I agree, with regards to the problems of subfs. Is there a way to turn this "off" for lack of a better way to phrase the question? I'd like to use the old mount/umount system personally.
Preston
# o /data1/usr/src/kernel-modules/subfs/README
Submount-2.4 subfs version 0.2 May 16, 2003
Copyright (C) 2003 Eugene S. Weiss
Sid Boyce wrote:
Preston Crawford wrote:
I agree, with regards to the problems of subfs. Is there a way to turn this "off" for lack of a better way to phrase the question? I'd like to use the old mount/umount system personally.
Preston
# o /data1/usr/src/kernel-modules/subfs/README Submount-2.4 subfs version 0.2 May 16, 2003 Copyright (C) 2003 Eugene S. Weiss
Subfs is the kernel portion of the submount removable media handling system. For submount to function, it needs both the subfs kernel module and the submountd program to be installed.
For installation instructions, see the file INSTALL in this directory. ============================================================= It should be possible to "rmmod subfs" if it does not report busy. Another way would be to move the module e.g /lib/modules/2.6.4-54.5-default/extra/subfs.ko or /lib/modules/2.4.21-99-athlon/kernel/fs/subfs/subfs.o as appropriate out of the directory so it's not found on boot up, same for /sbin/submountd as an alternative. subfs is not in the standard kernels from kernel.org, it's available as a patch only and is still work in progress. I don't have it in my kernel.org kernels and apart from the message during boot that says it's not available in the kernel, everything behaves as before 9.1, usb printer, scanner, digital camera, webcam on both x86 and x86_64, plus a usb serial port and genius optical mouse on the x86_64 laptop. Regards Sid.
But the hotplug scripts in 9.1 no longer create entries in /etc/fstab, so that means the user cannot mount the device unless root makes the entry. Then there is the problem that USB hotplugged devices aren't guaranteed to show up as the same /dev/sd?? device each time, so entries in /etc/fstab can't really be static. -- _____________________ Christopher R. Carlen crobc@earthlink.net Suse 8.1 Linux 2.4.19
On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 17:15, Sid Boyce wrote:
It should be possible to "rmmod subfs" if it does not report busy. Another way would be to move the module e.g
Here's another question. I'm endeavoring to do this right now and in /etc/fstab I see an entry like this... usbfs /proc/bus/usb usbfs noauto 0 0 What is this? Is this related or something related to how usb is handled under the new kernel? Preston
participants (6)
-
Chris Carlen
-
Chris Carlen
-
Hartmut Meyer
-
Preston Crawford
-
Robert_Thilsted@ord.uscourts.gov
-
Sid Boyce