Bash scripts

[Kevin Gordon]

Sascha:

The file system actually had no bearing on the issue I was having, whether
ext2, ext3, or FAT32, the symptoms were identical - recent versions of
udisks now does not allow 'direct' execution of scripts from auto-mounted
removable media.

Also, there is some debate as to whether putting a journalling fs onto an SD
or USB drive is wise, as it might half its life by in essence doubling the
number of writes.  In general,  I tend to stick with the factory default
unless I need multiple partitions, symbolic link, or specific linux-swap
support, since I presume the manufacturer has formatted it with the right
number of blocks, units, etc to best match their controller/memory config.
If I need those, I will still use ext2.  Call me optimistic :-)

Cheers,

KG

On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 4:13 AM, Sascha Silbe <
sascha-ml-reply-to-2011-2 at silbe.org> wrote:

> Excerpts from Kevin Gordon's message of Mon Apr 18 00:36:26 +0200 2011:
>
> > But, since my main use of this technique is to
> > semi-automate the process of installing a slew of custom activities and
> > rpm's upon initial build and deployment, having to manually change every
> > machine manually to basically avoid 5 keystrokes, was sort of
> > counter-productive  :-)
>
> If you're only using this USB stick with Linux machines, why don't you
> just format it using a file system with POSIX semantics, i.e. ext3?
>
> Sascha
>
> --
> http://sascha.silbe.org/
> http://www.infra-silbe.de/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20110418/149eb968/attachment.html>