Discussion Overview
The discussion revolves around the scenarios in which one might choose to mount a filesystem in a non-empty directory. Participants explore the implications of such actions, including accessibility of the original directory's contents and potential use cases.
Discussion Character
- Debate/contested
- Exploratory
Main Points Raised
- Eus questions the rationale behind mounting a filesystem in a non-empty directory, noting that it renders the original contents inaccessible.
- Aquafire argues that technically, nothing is truly inaccessible when mounting a filesystem, and suggests there may be no good reason to do so, viewing it as a waste of time.
- Eus provides a specific example where mounting a filesystem in a non-empty directory is beneficial, such as when using ISO9660 images for games, allowing for a user-friendly selection menu without needing multiple mount points.
- Another participant challenges the claim that contents become inaccessible, citing personal experience with mounting filesystems like ISO images or network shares in their home directory without losing access to existing files.
- Participants express curiosity about the initial question, with Eus clarifying that their inquiry stemmed from a lack of understanding at first, but they later encountered a scenario that justified the action.
Areas of Agreement / Disagreement
Participants express differing views on the accessibility of original directory contents when a filesystem is mounted in a non-empty directory. Some agree with Eus's concerns, while others challenge the notion that contents become inaccessible, indicating a lack of consensus on the implications of such actions.
Contextual Notes
There are unresolved assumptions regarding the technical behavior of mounting filesystems in non-empty directories and the specific contexts in which this practice may be beneficial or problematic.
