Re: Bind mount bug?

[Frans Pop <elendil@planet.nl>]

On Sunday 11 November 2007, Roland Kuhn wrote:
> This mounts the bindtest/ tree on test/ _without_ copying the mount
> points which are found on subtrees.

Right. I guess this is the key point that tripped me up.

> So, you see, test/test/test/a was (as it should) physically created  
> in test/test, where it is shadowed by the bind mount as long as that  
> is not removed.

Which means that to continue the example from my follw-up mail:

> # ls bindtest/test
> foo
> # umount test
> # ls test
> foo
# umount bindtest/test
# ls bindtest/test
baz

And there indeed is the missing file.

> Nothing vanishes into "thin air" ;-)

Yeah, I saw that syntax error after sending the mail "into space" would have 
been OK too, but not my combining the two :-)

Thanks for the explanation!

Cheers,
FJP