Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 27 Jul 2000 21:36:50 -0700 | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | Subject | Re: multimounting cdroms ??? |
| |
Alexander Viro wrote: > > On Thu, 27 Jul 2000, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > > I don't want to have to try it before testing. However, what is worse, > > is that you're telling me "mount -t bind" will be replaced by something > > else, which I don't even know what it is. > > > > > should do it quite fine, no? Or C equivalent... Same goes for new API, > > > except that there C equivalent is even simpler - mount("foo","foo","", > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > > MS_MGC_VAL|MS_BIND, NULL) and check the return value. It will always fail > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > mount("old_place", "new_place", "", MS_MGC_VAL|MS_BIND, NULL) - no testing > needed. On the kernel witout MS_BIND it will always fail. On the new one > it will work, provided that both places exist, are either both directories > or both non-directories and you are root. For the current API call would > be mount("old_place", "new_place", "bind", MS_MGC_VAL, NULL) - same > situation, but messier code in fs/super.c. > > Is that OK with you? If you want some other indication that mechanism is > in place - tell me what sort of indicator you want.
This is OK with me, *IF AND ONLY IF* we don't want to add to /etc/mtab, or mess around with the locks mount(8) does... I refuse to code that into autofs. The C equivalent is quite nice; however, it is rather unfortunate from an autofs standpoint that the "both directories or both non-directories" requirement exists (autofs don't have "non-directories".)
-hpa
-- <hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private! "Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot." http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt
- 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/
| |