[BusyBox] What does it mean when I find bugs in the standard mount?
rob at landley.net
Tue Aug 2 10:10:46 UTC 2005
On Tuesday 02 August 2005 04:33, Rob Sullivan wrote:
> Perhaps util-linux needs a patch then ;)
Better yet, ubuntu should symlink /etc/mtab to /proc/mounts (since that's the
ONLY way to get per-process namespaces to work properly; a file based mtab is
an anachronism that's going away eventually).
I'm not really any more interested in fixing mtab than I am in fixing devfsd.
(I have to implement it in my mount rewrite to get it accepted, and if I'm
going to implement it the thing is going to be tested and work right on
general principles, but in the long run all this is going away and what's
important is to get every corner case to work smoothly with /proc/mounts.)
The traditional corner case that didn't work right when /etc/mtab pointed
to /proc/mounts was loopback support (umount would leak loop devices). THAT,
I have fixed...
More information about the busybox