Mount fixed partitions by default for F7. Was: [BUG] Mounted partitions are not showing up and CD/DVD link not correct

Richard Hughes hughsient at
Wed Mar 21 01:31:05 UTC 2007

On Tue, 2007-03-20 at 21:24 -0400, David Zeuthen wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-03-21 at 01:09 +0000, Richard Hughes wrote:
> > On Mon, 2007-03-19 at 17:56 +0000, Richard Hughes wrote:
> > > 
> > > Is this a rh-legal type problem (in which case I understand) or
> > > rh-desktop policy (which can be re-evaluated)? Personally I've
> > > explained the 99-fixed-disk thing to at least 4 or 5 people new to
> > > linux, and they all thought it was a crazy decision. No offence
> > > intended.
> > 
> > Any feedback on this? Thanks.
> That's a bit pushy.

Yes sorry, that's part of who I am :-)

> Well, it's certainly not a rh-legal thing and as I'm
> the package maintainer it ends up being my decision (though I guess the
> board can overrule my decisions)... and I don't think this change is
> justified so I'm just going to say no, sorry.

Sure, no worries. I just wanted some sort of conclusion to this thread.
This might be worth putting as a FAQ on fedoraproject or something IMO.

> FWIW, what really needs to happen is something a lot more flexible and
> more fine grained than pam_console so different Fedora spins can ship
> with different defaults, e.g. a desktop oriented spin (or livecd or
> whatever) will ship with this bit "on"; server / corp desktop oriented
> spins can ship with this bit "off". And even when the bit is "off" what
> yuou want is to explain to the user that this operation is locked down
> and give them an option to e.g. auth (as super user) to perform the
> operation anyway.

Sure, seems sane.

> Sounds familiar? That's because I've wrote about all that about more
> than a year ago
>  (ignore most of the implementation details; this is afterall more
>   than a year old.)
> but have been both busy with frying other fish plus I wasn't happy with
> the overall architecture of the code I ended up with - just too damn
> complex / abstrat plus it requires a whole new system-wide daemon. It
> works though; SUSE is already shipping PolicyKit AFAIK.
> I have some plans on how to greatly simplify PolicyKit (now that we have
> ConsoleKit and D-Bus system bus activation is on the horizon) but
> haven't had time to put these thoughts into email form just yet.
> Eventually.



More information about the devel mailing list