Maybe I wasn't clear, but what I was trying to say in my earlier mail
that the issue at hand isn't really a big deal; if you think about it
it's a quite absurd discussion isn't it? We're talking about people who
wants to hide mounted partitions from the desktop.
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.
Now, you (or rather, the people with 8 linux distros on their system)
can argue that you didn't mount the partition yourself; that damn GNOME
did that for you automatically. So maybe the answer is that we need more
fine grained control of what gets automounted and what doesn't .
Maybe it means adding an option so this dialog
looks like this
[ ] Remember authorization
[ ] For this session only
[ ] For this volume only
Yay, more options. But fear not. The desktop live cd for F9 and onwards
will come configured to never show the users such stupid annoying
dialogs (note: only I may call them annoying and stupid because I wrote
them :-) hehe) because we'll grant the user this authorization by
default (we can make assumptions about how the desktop live cd is used
since it's, uhm, targeted for desktops).
And all the people with 8 linux distros on their system can then just
use polkit-gnome-authorization or whatever to tweak the authorizations
such that the file systems they want hidden aren't mounted.
 : And that's in the PolicyKit road map already; basically what needs
to be done is the ability to tie authorizations with object paths; e.g.
being able to answer questions like "can $PROGRAM do $ACTION on $OBJECT"
rather than just "can $PROGRAM do $ACTION" as it is today.