On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 10:10 AM, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 5:32 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: >> i think this would be a good idea >> >> PHP (my main language) is fighting with traling slash or not troubles >> over all the years, but there is nothing to stop the boot-process and >> systemd is a very different level of software > > Let's be clear...the bug was actually in mount...not systemd. ÂAnd the > fix has been committed for the mount binary according the bug ticket > against the utils-linux package. So the problem has been solved very > quickly after the _correct_ developers were notified via the > established bug tracking mechanism. > > And its a weird bug for mount...not what I would have expected. > > Simple test outside of systemd for everyone falling along using a ntfs > disk I just happened to have. > First using an entry like this without a slash > /dev/sdb1        /mnt          ntfs  Âdefaults    Â0 0 > > mount /mnt Âand mount /mnt/  both work and the drive mounts > > Second using an entry like this with a slash > /dev/sdb1        /mnt/          ntfs  Âdefaults    Â0 0 > > mount /mnt Âfails to mount with an error Âand mount /mnt/ Âsucceeds > > > What my very simple test shows is that this is totally inconsistent > behavior on the part of mount in handling trailing slashes or the lack > thereof. ÂThere's no good reason why Âthat 1 failure should be > happening especially when clearly the mount binary is internally > manipulating trailing slashes in some cases. If it wasn't then I > should have gotten a failure in the first case. > > Reindi, > If you want to be passionate and be upset about system breakage, that > is absolutely your right to do so. ÂBut I caution you that you are not > channeling your passion effectively. ÂI hope in the future you budget > some time as a volunteer to be involved in the pre-release testing so > you can help catch problems prior to release. ÂI also hope you learn > to be less aggressive when discussing issues with people with whom you > don't have an established working relationship. > > And please, avoid prejudicing a new component of the software stack > when things like this happen. New code typically does a better job at > tickling implicit assumptions than experienced sysadmins and testers. > In this case, mount is broken, and has been broken for years, and > we've all been living with that brokenness and not realizing it > because we've conditioned ourselves to interact with mount in a way > that avoids the breakage. ÂPlease, lay the blame at the feet of the > correct piece of software. ÂIn this case the mount binary is behaving > inconsistently and has undocumented quirks that have gone unfixed for > YEARS until this bug was filed and fixed. FIXED...I can't stress that > enough...the fix has already been committed and we are just waiting > for packages now. > > All systemd was doing was breaking an _undocumented_ _implicit_ > _assumption_ that the mount command was using to map mount cmdline > mountpoints to fstab entry mountpoints. ÂMount was assuming that when > an fstab entry had a trailing slash then the mount cmdline mntpoint > argument would also have a trailing slash and mount was failing when > the trailing slash was missing in the cmdline argument. ÂIs there a > good reason for mount to do this? I can't think of one so far noone > has defended mount's behavior in this regard. And as far as I know its > not a documented behavior of mount. And since its not documented there > was no reason that anyone (including the systemd authors) could know > that stripping the trailing slash when parsing the fstab entry would > cause mount to fail. Doubly so when the slash is missing mount > processes cmndline mountpoints with trailing slashes without issue. > I understand the inconsistency and it is indeed a bug in mount. Nevertheless you are missing the point. If X worked before (X=mounting at boot with fstab containing trailing slashes), and stops working now because of the change Y I made, I am responsible for fixing X or Y. The question of 'which one contains the bug' is irrelevant for the user. Some folks think that this is a corner case and it is easy to miss. I think that this is a fundamental mistake and this should be one of the first things a programmer should learn. It pretty much compares a physicist forgetting F=ma. Well, we all do mistakes. Unfortunately, it caused problems for at least a couple people. Hopefully the programmer learned his lesson. Orcan -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
