The mountall man page says "this is a temporary tool until init(8) itself" can do it, basically. Why not just use mount -a? Is there a difference between the two, and if so, which should I use for what?
Asked
Active
Viewed 3.0k times
1 Answers
7
According to the man page, the ubuntu version of mountall does the following :
- reads fstab(5)
- calls fsck(8)
- calls mount(8)
- and calls swapon(8)
Canonical does not provide much information on the reason why they had to build a "temporary tool".
According to mount manual, mount -a "[...] causes all filesystems mentioned in fstab to be mounted[...]".
Anyway, I advise you to use mount -a as it works on most unices.
-
Seems you are saying you don't see the difference either, right? – Johannes Ernst Sep 17 '12 at 22:48
-
2Not at all. For example, I can't see where mount -a would launch fsck (just quickly checked source code and man page) and mountall is described as temporary. – Sep 17 '12 at 23:05