CDs mount to volume name

[alan]

On Fri, 10 Feb 2006, Michal Jaegermann wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 10, 2006 at 11:01:38AM +0100, Karsten Fischer wrote:
> > Am Donnerstag, den 09.02.2006, 09:14 -0700 schrieb Michal Jaegermann:
> > > On Thu, Feb 09, 2006 at 10:03:33AM +0100, Karsten Fischer wrote:
> > > > Am Mittwoch, den 08.02.2006, 17:04 -0700 schrieb Michal Jaegermann:
> > > > > 
> > > > > Specific examples, please.  Or you have to be kidding.
> > > > 
> > > > Easily. I put in a media called "Tax2005" and its is mounted
> > > > on /media/Tax2005, regardless of which drive
> > > > (DVD-ROM,CD-ROM,DVD/CD-Writer, CD-Writer) I use.
> > > 
> > > In other words depending on which CD, and in which order you stuck
> > > in one of your multiple drives (volume labels are far from unique)
> > > you are looking for your data in different places in a directory
> > > treee.  Extreme consistency indeed.
> > 
> > Really? I put in the CD "Tax2005" - let me check this, yes - and it is
> > mounted, every time, on every device, as /media/Tax2005.
> 
> No, this is clearly false in general.  You wrote yourself that you
> have more than one device where you can put such disk.  If you
> happen to have more that one CD with a volume label "Tax2005", which
> is far from impossible, and you put another already and now you are
> sticking the original one into another reader, then it will NOT get
> mounted under /media/Tax2005.

It also depends on the user knowing what the volume name is and expecting 
it to mount under that name.

Is there any version of Linux that does that currently?

All installers that I know of expect a static mount point,.  HAL is new.  
Anything that was written before then will not work.  They will have to 
write a special case for Fedora > 4 just because someone wanted a pretty 
looking mount point.

> > The problem is to look at the pros and cons
> > and to find out if the gain outweighs the drawbacks. Which, in this
> > case, I think it does.
> 
> How come when you have exactly zero gains and you create a huge
> mess elsewhere?

Every installer for Linux that I have depends on a static mount point.

Install Quake 4 or Doom 3 or Unreal Tournement 2004 or any other 
multi-disc install and watch what happens.  Regular users are not going to 
know how to hack around this.  The rest of us are going to be pissed that 
we do have to hack around it.

I still don't get why we need this change.

When I plug in my 60 gig usb laptop drive, it does not give the volume 
name in Nautilus, it just describes the drive.  ("55.9 gig drive" or 
somesuch.)  Why not just have the Nautilus icon display the volume name 
and leave the mount point alone? 

-- 
"George W. Bush -- Bringing back the Sixties one Nixon at a time."