On Thu, May 23, 2002 at 06:04:53PM +0100, Russell King wrote:
> On Thu, May 23, 2002 at 06:01:05PM +0100, Ian Molton wrote:
> > On Tue, 21 May 2002 17:11:34 -0200
> > Denis Vlasenko <email@example.com> wrote:
> > > > I was wondering if a solution to this would be to introduce 'named'
> > > > loopback devices.
> > > Have no time to think about this now, but will test any patches -
> > > I want /etc/mtab -> /proc/mounts to become standard practice
> > me too. :-)
> /proc/mounts and /etc/mtab contain different information. /etc/mtab can
> contain what ever information a user space app needs. /proc/mount can't.
> See the following as a perfect example, specifically the automount and
> NFS entries.
> Also, remember that mount uses /etc/mtab to perform synchronisation
> between two concurrent mount requests for the same device/resource.
It is clear to me that what really needs to happen is to
retire /etc/mtab. It seems to be the last file in /etc that
needs to be written. Mount, df and others need to look
elsewhere and we might need a syscall (if it doesn't exist)
to support umount and root pivoting when not even proc is
mounted. It might be a pain to coordinate but should be
-- ________________________________________________________________ J.W. Schultz Pegasystems Technologies email address: firstname.lastname@example.org
Remember Cernan and Schmitt - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to email@example.com More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri May 31 2002 - 22:00:14 EST