On 1 Feb 2000, Christoph Rohland wrote:
> GOTO Masanori <gotom@debian.or.jp> writes:
>
> > And now I have a question:
> > I guess almost all users have no shmpath (default: /var/shm),
> > and they maybe make a dir and have to mount it.
> > IMHO, it is better to change that sysv shared memory works
> > samely, whenever shmfs is not mounted. Is it feasible,
> > or only my mistaken ?
>
> This was my first attempt, but all the gurus opposed to that since
> this needed some hacks to the VFS layer.
>
> Since shmat, etc rely on the VFS functions, we have to mount the fs to
> use these functions.
Why not use //shm for the path, or //proc/shm so that if the kernel will
ever honour the extra // namespace even no hacks are required to have
the shmfs mounted in every chroot environment? Btw, proc should be
mounted as //proc, too. Using /var/shm is too much educating the user
IMHO. If you have to mount the shmfs by using mount anyway would it not
be possible to extract the directory used by using the information from
the remount_fs() superblock operation?
Richard.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Feb 07 2000 - 21:00:06 EST