On Dec 30, 2007 10:33 PM, David Zeuthen <davidz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I'd like to think that if you have a dedicated partition that you > actually go through the trouble of mounting at a non-standard mount > point, then it's because you have data on it that you want to access. If > you want to access the data, then you should get an icon on the desktop. For the simple user desktop case, I would agree with you. But there are non-trivial multiuse scenarios that aren't easily planned for that end up being a hybrid of desktop and server. Personally ive been using the 99-redhat file to hide internal partitions on the machines at home from desktop users which are mounted on demand by services that make use of the storage area. Doing it at the hal layer makes it hide everywhere in the Gnome interface: Computer, Desktop, and disk mounter applet, which makes more sense to me. Having all partitions show up in computer window as mountable but only having some appear on the Desktop as mounted, doesn't make sense to me either. Being able to turn off disk icons as a group in the desktop, I understand, but selectively its difficult to see why you want them to still be mountable but not show up on the Desktop when mounted. I don't really understand why Valent wants a solution so high up in the software stack and just worrying about hiding already mounted partitions selectively. I'm trying real hard to understand the reasoning to just hide the mounted systems on an individual basis. If we were going to hide things, I would think we'd want to hide them from the Gnome desktop everywhere and that means doing it in the Hal layer so they don't show up in the Computer window as a mountable partition. Maybe Valent doesn't really means what he thinks he means. -jef -- Fedora-desktop-list mailing list Fedora-desktop-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-desktop-list
