mount(8) in /stand?

[Ivan Voras]

2009/2/7 Giorgos Keramidas <keramida at ceid.upatras.gr>:
> On Sat, 07 Feb 2009 03:16:46 +0100, Ivan Voras <ivoras at freebsd.org> wrote:
>> Judging by Google's results I'm only one of many people frustrated by the
>> lack of mount(8) in the "emergency holographic shell". My problem is that
>> I have everything I need to install the system (on a "netbook" laptop -
>> no CD reader) on the USB drive I booted from, but no way to get to the
>> data (the network drivers need to be patched before they can be used so
>> net install is out, sysinstall doesn't recognize the directory structure,
>> has no way of mounting msdosfs, etc.). I see the mount executable is ~~
>> 17 kB:
>>
>> -r-xr-xr-x  1 root  wheel  17232 Dec 29 15:29 /sbin/mount*
>>
>> This is about the third time I needed it in similar circumstances so is
>> probably not unreasonable to request it be crunched in for the future?
>> It's certainly one of the basic emergency utilities.
>
> You have to account for the size of several mount_xxx executables too.
> My userland is now installed with DEBUG_FLAGS='-g' so the sizes are not as
> large as they seem below, but we need at least *some* of these to be in
> `/stand' before `/stand/mount' is usable e.g. for cd9660 mounts:

What is the relationship between mount and mount_xxx? Is it that some
file systems cannot be mounted at all if there's no mount_xxx or it's
just there to provide advanced or unusual options? Actually what I'm
asking is: can "local" file systems that normally have mount_xxx be
mounted just with mount, assuming all options default, or they
specifically and unconditionally require the special mount_xxx? I
think msdosfs, cd9660 and udf are most important here.