Re: [PATCH] umount: allow non-root umount of FUSE even if not in fstab

[Karel Zak <kzak@redhat.com>]

On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 10:56:01AM +0200, Petr Uzel wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 10:51:30AM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > On Tue, 2011-03-29 at 10:46 +0200, Petr Uzel wrote:
> > > > Wouldn't be better to always call /sbin/umount.fuse for non-roots (except
> > > > umount -i)? 
> > > 
> > > Yes, that's what I meant by umount helpers. The problem is that AFAICS
> > > fuse does not provide this helper.
> > > 
> > > @Miklos: what do you think? Would it make sense to have umount.fuse
> > > (most likely as symlink to /sbin/mount.fuse)? I could look into it.
> > 
> > Could umount.fuse allow umount of fuse filesystem even if not in fstab?

By default umount(8) requires an entry in /etc/fstab. This behaviour
could be changed by uhelper= mount option (the option has to be in
mtab). The solution based on uhelper= also sucks, because it requires
userspace specific mount option...

This is reason why I think that /etc/mount.d/fuse.conf would be better
than add an exception to the code or use uhelper= mount option. The
same problem we have with HAL (udisks) where non-root user stuff is
not in fstab.
 
> > If so, then I don't see any problem with providing /sbin/umount.fuse.
> 
> OK, I'll try to look into it.

It will require the exception for fuse.

    Karel


-- 
 Karel Zak  <kzak@redhat.com>
 http://karelzak.blogspot.com