On Tuesday 24 April 2007, Karel Zak wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 07:28:25AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > ---
> > mount/mount.c | 2 +-
> > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/mount/mount.c b/mount/mount.c
> > index 8e850b0..ea5ddc9 100644
> > --- a/mount/mount.c
> > +++ b/mount/mount.c
> > @@ -759,7 +759,7 @@ update_mtab_entry(const char *spec, const char *node,
> > const char *type, print_one (&mnt);
> >
> > if (!nomtab && mtab_is_writable()) {
> > - if (flags & MS_REMOUNT)
> > + if (fake || (flags & MS_REMOUNT))
> > update_mtab (mnt.mnt_dir, &mnt);
> > else {
> > mntFILE *mfp;
>
> Sorry, NAK.
>
> man mount (about -f):
> Causes everything to be done except for the actual system call;
>
>
> there is nothing about any other exception. It's root's mistake when
> add to mtab duplicate entry. The mount command prevents duplicate
> mounts for "mount -a" or MS_USER/MS_USERS only. I don't think that we
> need an exception for fake mounts. The fake mount has to work exactly
> like normal mount otherwise it's nonsense.
well, the reason for the change was because of the usage in the man page you
also referred to:
Causes everything to be done except for the actual system call; if it's not
obvious, this fakes'' mounting the file system. This option is useful in
conjunction with the -v flag to determine what the mount command is trying to
do. It can also be used to add entries for devices that were mounted earlier
with the -n option.
that description (last sentence) indicates that the process should be a lot
more safe than it actually is ... if the change i proposed above is NACKed,
then perhaps the man page should be tweaked to indicate this possible
duplication in mtab ...
-mike
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
