-
Senior Member
registered user
There is always two sides to a coin. Either you call it knoppix created not enough loop devices or you call it knoppix created one too many loop device/directory.
Furthermore, if you could just extract a copy of /bin/mount from a knoppix 6.2 and test use it on your system ( you could copy it to say /tmp, and then issue command as /tmp/mount), then you will appreciate what I mean:- That extra loop device/directory is not disturbing the system at all with /bin/mount from knoppix 6.2. If you use a newer /bin/mount, yes, it matters.
-
Senior Member
registered user
Originally Posted by
kl522
There is always two sides to a coin. Either you call it knoppix created not enough loop devices or you call it knoppix created one too many loop device/directory.
Furthermore, if you could just extract a copy of /bin/mount from a knoppix 6.2 and test use it on your system ( you could copy it to say /tmp, and then issue command as /tmp/mount), then you will appreciate what I mean:- That extra loop device/directory is not disturbing the system at all with /bin/mount from knoppix 6.2. If you use a newer /bin/mount, yes, it matters.
I still don't understand this. Knoppix 6.2.1 created /dev/loop/0 - that's enough for Knoppix to mount on, but not for other purposes. So it's not one too many directories, it conforms to what newer versions try to use, just as you write. And we can, as I did, create more ourselves. I thought it seemed better to follow the development, but basically, I just wanted it to work. (And I'm not interested in more details than I absolutely need to know..)
Using your rm -rf /dev/loop trick, /dev/loop0../dev/loop7 are created afterwards - the old way. Seems to work just nice, BUT if some programs expect the newer organization, at least in theory it could be safer to use that? Instinctively, I'm not too happy with recursively deleting devices in init scripts.
-
Senior Member
registered user
Trying to find out more about this, I really get confused, as the /dev/loop/X way of naming seems to be associated with the deprecated devfs nomenclature. So it should be /dev/loopX? I would very much like to stay out of such silly naming discussions, but that Knoppix bug just placed me there
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
1TB/2TB USB 3.0 Flash Drive Thumb U Disk Memory Stick Pen PC Laptop Storage lot
$580.99
SAMSUNG 870 QVO Series 2.5" 1TB SATA III V-NAND Internal Solid State Drive (SSD)
$105.95
Type C USB 3.0 Flash Drive Thumb Drive Memory Stick for PC Laptop 1TB 2TB lot
$73.29
SanDisk 1TB Extreme microSDXC UHS-I Memory Card - SDSQXAV-1T00-GN6MA
$69.99
1TB Samsung 850 Pro Series 2.5" SATA 3 SSD MZ-7KE1T0BW HDD hard drive MZ-7KE1T0
$59.99
Samsung - Geek Squad Certified Refurbished 870 EVO 1TB SATA Solid State Drive
$67.99
1TB HDD/SSD 2.5" SATA Hard Drive for Laptop with Win 10/Win 11 Pro Pre-installed
$18.99
Patriot P210 128GB 256GB 512GB 1TB 2TB 2.5" SATA 3 6GB/s Internal SSD PC/MAC Lot
$19.99
Netac 1TB 2TB 512GB Internal SSD 2.5'' SATA III 6Gb/s Solid State Drive lot
$109.99
1TB 2TB Type C/USB-A USB 3.0 Flash Drive Thumb Drive Memory Stick for PC Laptop
$18.26