On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 06:49:20PM -0400, Ross Walker wrote:
> On May 17, 2010, at 6:44 PM, Ray Van Dolson <rayvd@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 06:41:40PM -0400, Ross Walker wrote:
> >> On May 17, 2010, at 5:37 PM, R P Herrold <herrold@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Mon, 17 May 2010, Phil Schaffner wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Stephen Harris wrote on 05/17/2010 12:15 PM:
> >>>>> Don't do NFS localhost mounts from fstab
> >>>>
> >>>> Why would you want to do localhost: NFS mounts anyway?
> >>>
> >>> Perhaps for a restricted 'regrafting' RO overmount down in a
> >>> autobuilder's chroot tree, rather than a 'bind' mount ? I can
> >>> see some rare uses for it as a way to solve ACL problems
> >>
> >> Since these are RO to local system why not mount them "soft,intr"?
> >>
> >> Or you could use automount.
> >
> > I didn't realize you couldn't do bind mounts read-only. Interesting.
> >
> > What about re-mounting the same block device (presumably as ext3) in
> > ro
> > mode at another mountpoint?
> >
> > Or if that complained, maybe created an additional block device under
> > /dev with identical major/minor numbers and mounting *that* RO?
> >
> > Maybe ext3 wouldn't handle that too well...
>
> Do not try that, at best it will give you inconsistent views of the
> file system, at worse it will scramble your file system.
>
> -Ross
I would like to try it, but definitely do not try it on data you can't
afford to lose. :)
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
