From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 24 May 2002 19:40:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 24 May 2002 19:40:40 -0400 Received: from vladimir.pegasys.ws ([64.220.160.58]:28677 "HELO vladimir.pegasys.ws") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Fri, 24 May 2002 19:40:39 -0400 Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 16:40:33 -0700 From: jw schultz To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: RFC - named loop devices... Message-ID: <20020524164033.B9600@pegasys.ws> Mail-Followup-To: jw schultz , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20020521015517.609d5516.spyro@armlinux.org> <200205211409.g4LE9HY31513@Port.imtp.ilyichevsk.odessa.ua> <20020523180105.141af04b.spyro@armlinux.org> <20020523180453.E29960@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.12i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 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 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. > [snip] 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 worth it. -- ________________________________________________________________ J.W. Schultz Pegasystems Technologies email address: jw@pegasys.ws Remember Cernan and Schmitt