On Mon, 2006-09-18 at 21:38 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 12:33:52 +0800 > Ian Kent <raven@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Mon, 2006-09-18 at 21:11 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 11:48:15 +0800 (WST) > > > Ian Kent <raven@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > If the timeout of an autofs mount is set to zero then umounts > > > > are disabled. This works fine, however the kernel module checks > > > > the expire timeout and goes no further if it is zero. This is > > > > not the right thing to do at shutdown as the module is passed > > > > an option to expire mounts regardless of their timeout setting. > > > > > > Is this a new feature, or a regression since <when>? > > > > It's a regression which I must have introduced a long time ago. I can go > > back and check the kernels if you'd like more specific info. > > > > It should work this way and a recent report alerted me to it. > > > > Well.. I'm trying to work out if it's a 2.6.18 thing or whether we can > hold it over. I had a quick look and it appears to be present as far back as 2002/06 in 2.4. I'm a bit puzzled why I haven't seen it before as I'm sure I've tested this over the years, never the less it looks so clearly wrong to me know. It's a bug fix and given it's been around so long, not a widely used. Personally I'd like to get it into 2.6.18. As always I'm happy with whatever decision you make. Ian - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
