Re: [PATCH] fix descriptions for AT_NO_AUTOMOUNT

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 3/10/22 05:46, Pádraig Brady wrote:
After looking at the kernel code, it seems that:
   fstatat() did _not_ imply AT_NO_AUTOMOUNT from 2.6.38 -> 4.11
     I'm not sure it even honored the AT_NO_AUTOMOUNT flag before 4.11
   fstatat() did imply AT_NO_AUTOMOUNT since 4.11

Ouch, so this whole thing has been a false alarm? Well, in some sense that's a relief; in another sense I wonder whether we should undo some of the recent Gnulib changes.



[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Documentation]     [Netdev]     [Linux Ethernet Bridging]     [Linux Wireless]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux