On Dec 30, 2007 10:33 PM, David Zeuthen <davidz(a)redhat.com> wrote:
I'd like to think that if you have a dedicated partition that
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.