Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

BarryK · Posted: Thu 21 Jun 2007, 09:38 Post subject:

Okay, I've modified the new Rox 2.6.1 PET package to recognise these filetypes and launch 'filemnt'.

I also made some small mods to 'filemnt', attached.

Vdisktool is interesting, it does more stuff, like the virtual disk. Definitely room for that in Puppy too. I'll check it out more closely soon.

sunburnt · Joined: 08 Jun 2005 Posts: 5087 Location: Arizona, U.S.A.

Beem; If the sfs file is mounted & unioned for the Puppy that your running,
then there could be some nasty effects, if the sfs was copied to ram no prob.

GuestToo; Thanks, I got your tutorial about the mime files & the changes in
the files & folders from Puppy-1. Just what's needed for utility installs.

willhunt; I need to look at your app. & see what a virtual disk is.
If your app. does the same stuff as filemnt, we should integrate them.

Barry; I'll look at your mods., I'm not at my work PC at the moment.

BarryK · Posted: Thu 21 Jun 2007, 19:57 Post subject:

Oh yeah, when I setup rox pet pkg, I selected mime-type names:

application/x-ext2-image:*.2fs
application/x-ext3-image:*.3fs
application/x-squashfs-image:*.sfs

which seemed consistent (sort of) with the pre-existing 'application/x-cd-image:*.iso)

sunburnt · Joined: 08 Jun 2005 Posts: 5087 Location: Arizona, U.S.A.

Barry; Looks like you got the code section I jumped over to work, I got tired of
beating my head on the keyboard trying to figure out why it didn't work.
I've used the same code repetedly but for some reason it just wouldn't work.

In the file you provided the initrd.gz code is commented out.
Archive uses the .gz extention, so this is a nonMIME situation with no handler.

Instead of the "already mounted" message, ROX should just popup the path.
I don't think using an already mounted & unioned file should cause a problem.

For no button on the "Unmount" info Xmessage, make the first line this:
Xdialog --title " Notice..." --no-button \

Puppy-1 didn't have a problem closing ROX, but ROX in Puppy-2 has changed.

The pet mime types will probably supersede filemnt in importance & priority.
This may kill using this utility for Puppy, Barry must decide it's fate...

======================================================
I'm not sure what willhunt's virtual drives are, I'm guessing just image files.
A GUI for making image files of types: ext2, ext3, sfs, & iso is another good idea.

Béèm · Posted: Fri 22 Jun 2007, 04:36 Post subject:

BarryK · Posted: Fri 22 Jun 2007, 08:00 Post subject:

Béèm · Posted: Fri 22 Jun 2007, 18:11 Post subject:

I have downloaded and installed this filemnt.gz now.
I don't see how it interacts with ROX, so I copied the filemnt bin on the desktop and dropped a sfs on it. (blabla.sfs)

I then look in /mnt and find indeed a new directory of which the contents is indeed the one od blabla.sfs, but I find the name of the directory odd with all the + signs in there. What is the signification?

sunburnt · Joined: 08 Jun 2005 Posts: 5087 Location: Arizona, U.S.A.

Beem; Linux doesn't allow "/" in file or dir. names, so to make unique dirs.
to use as mount points for the image files, I convert the paths "/" to "+".
I chose the "+" character instead of "-" & "_" because they're commonly
used to name dirs. & files, so the names unique & can be reconverted back.

So to look at the /mnt dir. you see: +Path+ImageFile as the mount dir.

willhunt · Joined: 05 Oct 2005 Posts: 495

just a thought but if you changed line 11 from

Béèm · Posted: Sat 23 Jun 2007, 04:26 Post subject:

sunburnt, I understand now the reason why you did as you do.
I was gonna make a suggestion, but willhunt did beat me by 20 minutes with the extra advantage he proposed a code. Smile

I wouldn't know how to suggest it with a code. Confused

But I still have the idea to do the mount in a more intuitive way by going to the file in ROX and doing a right click select mount as action.
And the action would probably be your filemnt program.

sunburnt · Joined: 08 Jun 2005 Posts: 5087 Location: Arizona, U.S.A.

Beem; See my post in the Suggestions forum about ROX.

willhunt; Using just the file name wouldn't allow mounting 2 pup_save.2fs files.
Say you wanted to copy files from one Save or work image file to another.
Using the path with the file name assures that there's no dup. mount points.
If the new mount point is the same as the old one, then the new file will be
mounted over the top of the older one & the old one can't be accessed.
This is an interesting result of mounting files over files, quite useful at times
as it causes the mounted image files to act like a stack... Last on, first off.

Béèm · Posted: Sat 23 Jun 2007, 19:25 Post subject:

sunburnt · Joined: 08 Jun 2005 Posts: 5087 Location: Arizona, U.S.A.

It'll be fine until you have 2 image files with the same name...

I'm not sure just what the problem is with: /mnt/+Path+FileName
And I'm not sure why /mnt/FileName is an improvement, because it's not.

willhunt · Joined: 05 Oct 2005 Posts: 495

sunburnt I understand why you did it that way I did not mean to suggest it was better just different Sad

if you addthison line 68
[code]if [ -f $MntPt ] ;then gxmessage "That mount point exisits please rename one of your files" ;exit 3 ;fi[code]
it should solve any problem that might arise
right?

sunburnt · Joined: 08 Jun 2005 Posts: 5087 Location: Arizona, U.S.A.

Yes, my suggestion was going to be to check for a preexisting mount point.
However, mount points are dirs. & not files ( if [ -d $MntPt ];then ).
This just stops duplicate image files from being mounted, not the best arrangement.

I'm just puzzled as to why you want to change code that does a better job.
My code will mount any number of image files, anywhere, with no conflicts.
I don't understand exactly what it is that your attempting to accomplish.