From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: util-linux-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: from ishtar.tlinx.org ([173.164.175.65]:38696 "EHLO Ishtar.sc.tlinx.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726452AbeJAGIQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Oct 2018 02:08:16 -0400 Message-ID: <5BB15D3A.8040507@tlinx.org> Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2018 16:33:14 -0700 From: L A Walsh MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Karel Zak CC: util-linux@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] util-linux v2.33-rc1 References: <20180925104701.y2gwtwe2bquynap2@ws.net.home> In-Reply-To: <20180925104701.y2gwtwe2bquynap2@ws.net.home> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Sender: util-linux-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 9/25/2018 3:47 AM, Karel Zak wrote: > The commands mount and umount --- I note that umount has a static option umount.static, but I don't see the same for mount (i.e. mount.static). It seems the main benefit of static is to ensure the command will run if there is a problem with runtime-linking or if libraries are missing. Examples might be a root FS that may have significantly reduced content but enough to do FS restore operations, emergency repairs and load kernel modules that will allow one to bring up rest of the system. Basic functionality would include ability to mount file systems and ideally format, manage partitions, and restore file systems from backups. Some utilites necessary to do such tasks are outside the scope of util-linux, but at least the ability to mount/umount a file system, fdisk and partition management. Could it be ensured that one can 'mount' disks under adverse conditions, at the very least, so that umount.static would make sense? > The command rename(1) provides a new command line option --interactive to ask > before overwriting. > --- How does rename compare with 'mmv'? I note that in the manpage "SEE ALSO" section, 'mv' is listed, (not quite sure why?), but not a more related tool like 'mmv'.