No volumes in Linux?

[Bob Warren]

No, you're right Alex, they're probably better termed "top-level
directories" as you suggest. Being a newbie in Linux (after only Windows
experience) is still a bit confusing at the moment! As far as I know, the
main logical partitions of the HD on my Linux machine are "primary" and
"swap". Nevertheless, I would be happier getting something out of the
"volumes" request rather than nothing at all. Rebol seem to have taken the
same view, but I acknowledge that the list of "top-level directories" does
not exactly correspond to the description "volumes", and might be
misleading.

Since you obviously have much more experience than I regarding this subject,
you might be able to give me a tip or two. For example, let's suppose I have
2 HDs on my computer, and for the sake of argument I have separate distros
of Linux installed on each of them with a dual boot on my PC. And say I am
running RR under the Linux on my first HD. How should I (or indeed can I)
access data on the 2nd HD?

If you could clear the fog a little, I'd be grateful. Thanks.

Bob

----- Original Message -----
From: "Alex Tweedly" <alex at tweedly.net>
To: "Bob Warren" <warren at howsoft.com>
Cc: <use-revolution at lists.runrev.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2005 4:23 PM
Subject: Re: No volumes in Linux?


> Bob Warren wrote:
>
> >Thanks Alex and Ken!
> >
> >I have just tried the same thing in RB and Rebol. RB also returns empty.
> >Interestingly, Rebol gives a list of the partitions created by Linux -
which
> >at least is a bit more useful.
> >
> >e.g.
> >/usr
> >/bin
> >/boot
> >/dev
> >/home
> >etc.
> >
> >
> >
> Are each of those really separate partitions ?   Not simply different
> top-level directories ?
>
> >Does this really mean that although a computer may have 2 or 3 physical
> >drives, there is no way that RR can discover this in Linux? If so, I find
> >that rather disappointing, don't you?
> >
> >
> >
> No, I don't really.
>
> Physical disks ?
> Even on Win, "the volumes" gives you logical partitions, not physical
> disks. (e.g. my C: and D: are on the same disk, and Z: is on another
> machine entirely.Sometimes there is also Y: volume - and it's on the
> same disk (on the other machine) as Z:  ).
>
> On Unix, the mappings between top-level directories, partitions (or
> logical volumes as some Unix file systems call them) and physical disks
> are even more tenuous (even before we get to automount partitions ....).
>
> What is it that you really want to know ?
>
>
> --
> Alex Tweedly       http://www.tweedly.net
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.10.18/90 - Release Date: 05/09/2005
>